►
Description
Planning and Growth Management Committee, meeting 24, November 15, 2017 - Part 2 of 2
Part 1 of 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L__xPy5CazQ#t=9m35s
Agenda and background materials: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=11892
Meeting Navigation:
0:00:33 - Meeting resume
A
A
B
Afternoon
my
name
is
Alex,
dag
and
I'm
air
beam,
B's,
Public,
Policy
Manager
here
in
Canada
I'm,
also
tronto
nian,
and
an
Airbnb
host
I'd
like
to
express
my
thanks
to
all
members
of
the
planning
and
growth
committee
for
your
time
today
and
the
recognized
City
of
Toronto
staff
for
their
hard
work.
The
recommended
approach
before
you
has
clearly
been
carefully
considered,
since
this
matter
was
first
examined
by
executive
committee.
Back
in
January,
2016
Airbnb
has
been
pleased
to
fully
participate
in
the
process.
B
Since
the
beginning,
sharing
extensive
data
about
our
host
and
guest
community
with
the
city
staff
and
counselors
have
also
heard
from
hundreds
of
responsible
air
beep.
Excuse
me,
Airbnb,
hosts
from
every
corner
of
the
city.
The
approach
recommended
by
city
staff,
including
the
zoning
bylaw
amendments
you're,
considering
today,
is
one
of
the
toughest
in
North
America.
It
embraces
responsible,
Home
Sharing,
yet
is
firm
and
clear
that
commercial,
short-term
rentals
won't
be
allowed
in
Toronto.
Well,
we
don't
agree
with
everything
that
is
being
proposed.
B
We
see
stas
recommended
approaches,
one
that
reflects
what
they
heard
from
the
people
of
Toronto
and
learned
from
the
experience
of
other
cities
around
the
world.
It's
designed
to
meet
Toronto's
specific
needs
in
priorities.
We
are
concerned
about
how
these
zoning
amendments
will
combine
with
licensing
regulations
and
are
considering
that
carefully.
The
proposed
zoning
bylaw
amendments
rightfully
make
it
clear
that
any
Torontonians,
whether
they
live
in
the
city
should
be
able
to
benefit
from
home
sharing.
Most
importantly,
it
clearly
recognizes
that
Torontonians
should
be
allowed
to
share
their
home
in
Toronto.
B
There
are
principal
residents
whether
they
own
or
rent,
the
majority
of
our
host
community
responsibly
and
respectfully
only
share
their
own
home.
Like
all
of
us,
they
care
about
the
homes
that
they
live
in,
keep
them
clean
and
safe,
and
our
respectful
of
their
neighbors
they've
chosen
to
casually
share
their
homes
with
guests
to
help
earn
modest
supplemental
income.
This
extra
income
helps
helps
them
make
ends
meet
or
helps
them
afford
the
cost
of
housing
in
our
increasingly
expensive
city.
B
For
many,
especially
seniors
who
could
be
on
a
fixed
income,
it
allows
them
to
age
in
place
and
potentially
stay
in
their
home
or
from
Millennials
it
could.
It
can
help
enable
them
to
purchase
their
first
home
or
to
pay
their
rent.
We
also
strongly
support
the
recommendation
to
allow
hosts
to
share
their
legal
secondary
suite
if
it
is
part
of
their
principal
residence.
The
city
staff
report
is
very
clear.
B
The
proposed
rules
will
only
permit
a
maximum
of
one
secondary
suite
to
be
used
as
a
short-term
rental
per
dwelling
unit
in
the
principal
residence
of
the
short-term
rental
operator.
Furthermore,
Home
Sharing
in
this
case
will
only
be
allowed
in
legal,
secondary
Suites.
This
respects
a
homeowners
right
to
decide
whether
they
want
to
share
part
of
their
home
where
they
live.
Families
are
diverse
and
change
over
time,
as
do
their
needs
for
the
extra
space
in
their
homes.
B
Many
of
our
hosts
use
these
secondary
Suites,
such
as
basement
apartments
and
in-law
suites
for
family
grown
children
or
grandparents
who
stay
with
them
during
the
year.
They've
made
it
clear
to
us
and
a
city
stop
that,
because
they
need
the
flexibility
to
use
this
space
for
themselves.
They
don't
and
will
not
make
these
available
for
long-term
rental.
B
B
C
B
We're
here
to
talk
about
what
the
regulations
are
gonna
be
going
forward.
We
have
long
said
that
we
think
Home
Sharing
should
be
regulated
here
in
the
City
of
Toronto,
and
that's
what
we're
talking
about
so
once
that
regulation
is
passed.
If,
if
there
are
truly
commercial
house
that
you're
describing
in
your
neighborhood,
they
will
not
be
allowed
to
continue
to
do
what
they're
doing
so.
C
Thank
you
for
that,
but
that's
not
quite
what
I
was
asking
I
asked.
You
know
I
heard
in
your
arguments
that
the
reason
why
you
air
B&B
feel
we
should
be
doing
this
is
because
it
allows
homeowners
to
supplement
their
income.
Currently
Airbnb
has
dozens
of
listings,
where
that
is
not
the
case
where
it's
just
a
commercial
landlord
displacing
low-income
tenants
and
I'm
wondering
what
you're
doing
about
that.
We've.
B
Actually
removed
in
the
past
numerous
listings
from
our
platform
that
had
been
brought
to
our
attention
and
have
you
know
continually
to
look,
you
know
actually
look
at
what's
going
on
in
our
platform.
I,
don't
think
you've
shared
those
addresses
with
us
for
us
to
be
able
to
look.
Look
at
those
we'd
be
happy
to
do
so.
However,
what
we're
talking
about
is
moving
into
a
regulated
environment.
That's
what
we're
discussing
and
I
think
it's
an
appropriate
move
and
and
that
the
city's
moving.
C
B
It's
more
complicated
than
that
I
think
you
know,
the
city
is
talking
about
designing
a
regulation
that
you
know
the
city
is
the
government
and
the
city
needs
to
enforce
its
own
laws.
We
do
believe
that
we
should
partner
with
the
city
and
assist
in
doing
that,
and
actually
the
proposal
is
talking
quite
clearly
about
licensing
the
platform,
which
is
what
we'll
be
talking
about
and
debating
tomorrow.
C
But
I
quite
hurt
quite
clearly
heard
you
say
and
I
asked
you
a
question
about
it
that
your
argument,
your
contention,
is
why
we
should
allow
this
is
that
you
are
offering
a
way
for
homeowners
to
supplement
their
income.
So
you
can
have
it
one
way
or
the
other
is
the
purpose
or
is
the
benefit,
as
you
argue
of
your
service,
that
homeowners
can
supplement
their
at
their
income
and
that's
the
service
you
provide.
B
You
know
I,
don't
see
it
as
one
way
or
another
we're
talking
about
moving
into
a
regulated
environment
where
they're
gonna
be
certain
rules
in
place,
and
the
rules
are
gonna
set
out
that
it
can
only
be
a
primary
homeowner
or
a
renter
in
the
principle
residents
sharing
their
home.
We're
saying
we're
supportive
of
that
going
forward.
B
In
this
regulated
environment,
we
think
it
makes
sense
in
a
City
of
Toronto,
given
the
housing
market,
giving
rental
affordability
all
those
things
I
also
want
to
say,
though,
is
that
at
this
point
you
know
the
vast
majority
of
our
hosts
and
our
platform
are
sharing
their
primary
residence.
That's
what
we're
talking
about?
Okay,.
C
And
my
final
question
I
mean
it
might
sound
to
you
facetious,
but
it's
actually
something
that's
very
important
to
me.
You
describe
what
your
clients
or
partners
or
whatever
you
call
them
is,
are
doing
as
sharing
now
I
feel
very
strongly
about
this.
But
when
I
taught
my
kids
to
share
I
didn't
say:
bring
your
toys
to
the
playground
and
charge
kids
for
them.
You're,
not
talking
about
sharing
you're
talking
about
renting
right.
B
A
D
So
let's
talk
about
the
regulation
system
moving
forward,
you
said
you
agreed
that
it
with
the
concept
with
basically
the
principle
that
we
started
all
this
regulation
that
it
needs
to
be
somebody's
primary
residency,
correct.
Yes,
so
what
do
I
tell
to
the
hundreds
of
people
that
live
in
secondary
units
in
my
my
area
that
have
fit
as
a
primary
residency
that
have
which
is
a
have
the
secondary
unit
as
their
primary
residency?
It's
somebody's
primary
residency,
correct
right.
B
So
if
someone
is
renting
or
is
in
a
secondary
residence,
we
believe
they
should
have
the
right
to
home,
show
at
home
share
as
well.
Just
like
the
homeowner,
though,
who
owns
the
home
and
may
have
a
secondary
unit
in
their
residence.
We
strongly
believe
that
they
should
have
a
right
to
home,
share
it
as
well.
So.
D
If
I
have
a
duplex,
yes,
I
have
a
duplex
I,
have
two
units
I'm
not
able
to
have
it
on
Airbnb.
If
I
have
a
secondary
unit,
I
would
be
able
to
have
it
as
an
owner.
I
would
be
able
to
have
it,
even
though
it's
somebody
else's
primary
residence
II
the
same
way
that
a
condo
is
I'm
or
the
same
way
that
I
do
plexus
or
a
triplexes.
It's
the
same
thing.
So
how
do
I
turn
to
those
residents?
What
do
I?
B
D
D
A
D
B
I'm
trying
and
what
I'd
like
to
say
is
that
you
know
a
landlord
is
forbidden
to
evict
a
tenant
in
order
to
turn
a
unit
into
short-term
rental.
What
we're
talking
about
is
allowing
a
homeowner
if
they
have
a
secondary
residence
to
be
able
to
use
it
for
their
families.
When
we
look
at
what's
happening
on
our
platform,
our
families.
D
B
D
B
D
So
if
I
tell
you
that
the
the
difference
is,
you
can
be
looking
at
the
property
and
they
look
exactly
the
same.
The
only
difference
is
that
a
duplex
it
was
built
at
the
time
that
the
house
was
built.
Iti
go
home,
tear
down
my
house
build
two
units.
It's
a
duplex
I
can't
put
it
on
Airbnb
I
built
the
same
house,
but
only
five
years.
I
have
the
additional
unit.
Now
I
can
put
it
on
Airbnb.
What
do
I
tell
two
people
like
that?
They
have
exactly
the
same
house
side
by
side.
D
B
B
How
families
are
using
their
secondary
Suites,
those
that
are
using
our
platform
is
because
they
use
it
for
their
families
from
time
to
time,
so
that
cannot
be
on
the
long
term
rental
market.
That's
the
point!
What's
the
percentage
of
that?
If
we
look
at
the
typical
host
in
our
platform,
who's
sharing
a
secondary
suite,
currently
they're,
sharing
it
just
over
three
months
out
of
12
months.
That's
not
a
unit!
That's
gonna
be
on
the
long
term
rental
market,
the
nine
months
of
the
year
they're
using
it
for
their
family.
A
B
The
hundred
and
eighty
day
proposal
is
something
coming
in
the
report
tomorrow,
I
believe
and
that
it
that,
as
proposed,
only
applies
to
an
entire
entire
home,
not
a
secondary
suite.
So
what
I'm
saying
is
that
currently,
the
typical
host
that
is
sharing
a
secondary
suite
on
our
platform
currently
is
sharing
just
over
three
months
a
year,
so
the
rest
of
the
time
they're
using
it
for
their
family
purposes.
Anybody.
A
Typical,
isn't
my
question:
I
want
to
know
the
number
of
Suites
or
the
percentage
of
them
at
our
long-term
use
as
revenue
compared
to
the
odd
one
that's
sharing
a
month
or
two,
because
secondary
Suites
were
not
permitted
in
homes
to
be
short-term
rentals.
They
were
permitted
in
homes
when
we
debated
that
to
be
housing
for
people
that
needed
a
secondary
suite
out
of
their
house.
So
my
question
to
you
again
is
statistically
how
many
of
the
properties
that
are
there
are
more
than
a
hundred
and
eighty
days,
yeah.
B
Is
the
median
number
of
what's
being
shared?
Currently
we
have
as
of
July
1
2017
739
secondary
suites
on
our
platform,
we
can't
tell
whether
that
they
are,
if
at
this
point,
whether
it's
a
tenant
within
the
secondary
suite,
that's
hosting
or
not.
We
don't
have
that
kind
of
granularity
of
data.
The
other
thing
we
have
seen
is
of
our
secondary
suites
that
are
on
our
platform.
B
A
E
E
E
Have
to
listen
to
you!
Thank
you
for
this
opportunity,
deputy
mayor
Milo,
my
home
councillor,
perks
and
your
esteemed
colleagues.
I
am
the
looking
like
bad
guy
I'm
here
as
a
host
I
have
lived
in
Parkdale
since
1980
bought
my
house
there
23
years
ago.
It's
my
neighborhood,
it's
my
home
I!
Don't
really
want
to
go
anywhere.
As
you
know,
housing
prices
have
risen
tremendously
and
I
now
today
in
fact
paid
five
hundred
and
six
dollars
in
property,
which
I
do
quite
happily
and
look
forward
to
paying
a
license
fee.
E
E
E
The
regulations
I
am
first
of
all
completely
in
agreement,
as
I
said,
with
the
licensing
fee.
I
wanted
to
speak
as
I
said
earlier,
but
I
wanted
to
speak
to
the
issue
of
housing,
which
has
been
a
great
concern.
I
know
to
a
lot
of
councillors,
including
my
own,
or
at
least
so
I
thought,
because
the
other
day
I
read
a
very
interesting
quote
of
his
with
regard
to
a
development
which
caused
quite
a
lot
of
ruckus.
E
Here
yesterday
in
on
April
article
in
the
Toronto
Star
council,
Perks
stated
that
people
quote
people
are
fed
up
with
governments
relying
on
the
private
market
to
solve
our
housing
problems
said
councillor
perks,
who
attended
Thursday
Tuesday's
meeting
quote.
We
need
public
investment
in
affordable
housing
right
now
and
we
needed
from
all
orders
of
government.
So
that's
something
that
I
really
believe
in
greatly
and
I.
I
do
consider
myself
to
have
been
a
very,
very
active
member
of
my
community.
E
I've
been
volunteering
for
decades,
but
I'm
providing
a
service
which
is
used
by
my
neighbors
for
the
greater
part.
My
guests
have
been
people
visiting
their
children
living
in
the
neighbourhood,
who
can't
afford
to
stay
in
a
downtown
hotel
and
have
to
travel
everyday
to
go
and
see
their
children
who
are
having
babies
or
who
have
grandchildren
are
going
through.
E
Whatever
life
experience,
they
also
provide
a
huge
amount
of
economic
activity
in
the
neighborhood,
as
I've
seen
from
piles
and
piles
of
receipts,
I
actually
took
one
huge,
pile,
I
couldn't
believe
it
four
thousand
dollars
a
couple
and
their
daughter
spent,
while
in
Toronto
so
I'm
here
in
some
ways
to
wash
my
hands
of
all
the
guilt
that
I
felt
and
to
tell
you
that
I'm
happy
with
the
regulations,
but
I
reserve
the
right
to
do
with
my
private
property,
as
I
need
to
do.
Thank.
C
E
E
Approximately
that
I'm
getting
from
what
I
was
intending-
and
that
was
my
other
issue-
was
that
I
spent
a
lot
of
money
on
this
apartment,
because
it's
my
pension
and
eventually
I
will
probably
move
down
there
and
rent
the
whole
house
to
a
family.
So
I
spent
a
lot
of
money
on
it
and
I
it.
So
it
wasn't
what
you
would
wasn't
gonna
be.
What
you
would
call
affordable
housing
I
was
expecting
to
to
get
about.
$1,500
is
what
I
told
the
market
would
30%.
E
Average,
sometimes
less
sometimes
more,
it
really
depends
on
how
long
people
stay
28-day
maximum.
They
got
25%
off
one
week
they
got
15%
off,
so
it
all
depends
on
how
you
know
it's
up.
I,
like
the
ability
to
I
created
it
with
the
space
that
I
can
teach
baking
in.
So
it's
blocked
for
that.
Sometimes
I
also
have
friends
with
whom
I
visit
in
the
country
when
they
come.
You
know
they
have
their
own
space
to
stay.
My
son
lives
in
Los
Angeles
when
he
comes
with
his
girlfriend.
They
can
stay
there
as
opposed
to.
C
D
D
Now,
all
of
a
sudden-
let's
put
an
example,
somebody
starts
opening
stores
or
garages
in
their
in
their
houses
right,
Wood
shops
beside
you.
Somebody
puts
a
wood
shop
beside
you,
it's
it's
a
commercial
activity.
They
need
that
to
to
a
for
their
house,
I
mean
shouldn't.
Don't
you
think
that
governments
have
a
role
in
absolutely
in
creating
this
policy.
E
E
D
E
But
but
I
will
remind
you
that
I,
you
know
what
I
quoted
counselor
perks.
Having
said
about
the
the
the
condo
development
at
King
and
Dufferin
and
I'm,
pretty
familiar
with
section
37
and
I
personally
feel
that
it
is
councils
responsibility
when
looking
at
these
developments
to
really
hold
these
developers,
I
mean
they
are
not
I
mean
I.
Consider
myself
to
be
a
far
more
deserving
member
of
the
private
sector
than
a
developer
to
be
told
to
be
given
that
that,
to
be
sorry
to
be.
E
Words
menopause
to
not
have
to
be
the
one
who's
who's
responsible
for
fulfilling
that
the
city's
housing
needs.
I
think
developers
are
far
more
should
carry
far
a
far
greater
weight
and
using
section,
37
and
and
not
just
as
I
heard
happen
in
this
particular
case,
getting
some
pittance
of
money
compared
to
what
they're
spending
on
the
luxury
apartments,
but
really
I
mean
I
I
would
go
for
City
Council
making
you
know
half
the
units
you
know
affordable
housing
in
any
new
development,
especially
in
a
neighborhood
like
I
know.
It's
not
easy,
but
two.
E
A
G
Okay,
good
afternoon
members
of
committee,
mr.
chair,
my
name
is
Peter
Toma
I'm,
a
partner
with
a
toronto-based
firm
urban
metrics
I'm,
a
registered
professional
planner
and
I'm,
also
professional
land.
Economists
I'm
very
pleased
to
be
before
this
committee
to
provide
my
comments
and
professional
opinions
regarding
the
the
item
before
us
today
and
sitting
before
you
I
recognize
that
significant
consultation
and
some
very
lively
discussions
have
taken
place
around
this
issue
and
I
understand
that
broad-based
consensus
has
been
an
ongoing
challenge.
G
G
G
So,
having
reviewed
the
proposed
zoning
framework,
it's
my
professional
opinion
that
they've
not
developed
a
clear-cut,
evidence-based
rationale
for
regulating
or
placing
restrictions.
The
use,
developing,
sound
and
defensible
public
policy
should
be
predicated
on
on
the
analysis
of
facts
and
not
rhetoric.
In
my
professional
opinion,
the
Planning
Department
has
not
been
given
the
appropriate
direction
to
address
the
implications
of
the
regulator
case.
G
The
regulatory
change
is
through
a
land
use
planning
lens
and
while
the
issues
of
short-term
rental
have
been
scrutinized
by
multiple
city
departments,
the
hotel
industry,
in
my
opinion,
has
effectively
been
given
a
free
pass
when
it
comes
to
changes
in
land
use.
The
Greater
Toronto
Airport
Authority
is
actively
planning
for
major
growth
in
travel
into
this
market.
The
GTA
and
its
partners
are
preparing
for
infrastructure
and
support
of
45
million
additional
passengers.
Oh
Peter
I
love.
G
H
G
F
G
I
mean
I
15
years
ago
there
were,
there
are
twenty
five
thousand
five
hundred
hotel
rooms
in
2016
there
were
twenty
five
thousand
two
hundred
hotel
rooms.
There
are
three
hundred
fewer
hotel
rooms
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
When
you
think
about
the
growth
that's
taken
place
in
this
market.
You
know
that
just
just
the
fact
that
the
number
of
hotel
rooms
is
actually
decreasing,
while
everything
we
know
about
the
City
of
Toronto
and
its
tourist
industry
is
increasing,
you
know.
G
Essentially,
the
hotel
industry
has
been
a
you
know,
for
all
intents
and
purposes
been
given
a
free
pass
by
enabling
them
to
her
hotel
room.
So
it's
disingenuous,
in
my
opinion,
if
you're
asking
me
as
a
planner,
you
know
to
have
this
debate
around
if
you're,
trying
to
from
a
planning
perspective
you
the
city,
this,
this
committee
should
be
focused
on
ensuring
that
the
accommodation
sector
is
appropriately
addressed
and
the
only
area
in
which
that
this
gap
is
being
addressed.
G
I
can
see
the
councillor
waving,
but
the
only
area
where
this
is
being
addressed
is
the
air
B&B
and
similar
home
sharing
platforms
are
essentially
being
been
tasked
with
filling
that
gap
between
the
number
of
accommodations
and
the
amount
of
growth
that's
taken
place
in
the
in
the
travel
secretary.
Thank.
D
You
so
I
actually
share
your
concerns
to
the
point
that
I
asked
report
that
is
actually
going
to
be
at
economic
development
on
Friday
about
this
same
issue,
because
this
is
a
concern,
but
as
a
land
plan
user.
Don't
you
think
that
this
so
we're
gonna
be
replacing
the
hotel
functioned
commercial
activity
in
our
residential
neighborhoods
is
because,
because
I,
what
I
keep
hearing
from
people
that
do
home
sharings
is
that
this
is
a
different
experience
which
I
believe
it
is
people
that
go
to
a
Home
Sharing.
D
G
Mean
I'm
happy
to
address
that
question.
You
know
I,
think
I
think
on
principle.
You
know
if
you're
talking
about
housing
as
a
commercial
proposition
as
there's
a
there's,
a
financial
relationship
between
a
landlord
and
a
tenant
or
a
hotel
operator
and
a
guest
I
mean
they
are.
There
are
essentially
commercial
transactions
that
take
place
between
guests
and
and
hotel
yers
in
much
the
same
way
as
there
are
between
landlords
and
tenants.
D
Suggestion
that
I'm
just
wondering,
if
that's
the
best
approach
to
solve
the
hotel
issue
to
solve
it
that
way,
because
I
also
don't
think
that's
the
question
that
we
asked
our
residents
is
if
they
want
to
have
hotels
in
their
neighborhoods
right.
That's
I'm,
pretty
sure
that
the
consultations
that
we
had
with
residents
of
Toronto
was
not.
Do
you
want
to
solve
the
hotel
issue?
By
doing
this,
you
know
people
were
always
told
that
Home
Sharing
is
a
different
experience,
a
different
approach.
D
G
I
mean
I
again
and
to
your
point
and
with
respect
through
the
chair,
I
mean
you
know,
I
have
to
stress
that
we're
talking
about
regulating
the
use
and
not
the
user,
so
to
suggest
that
a
user
that
comes
with
the
best
intentions
of
visiting
the
city
and
intends
on
staying.
You
know
two
weeks
that
the
intentions
of
that
person
are
fundamentally
different,
that
that
they're
going
to
generate
more
nuisance,
more
garbage
more,
you
know
on
any
on
any
planning
rationale.
A
I
E
Good
afternoon
councilman
and
special
hello
to
mr.
Cheon,
oh
I'm,
part
of
Ward
5
in
Etobicoke
and
I,
am
a
Airbnb
host,
as
is
my
family
and
I'm
here,
just
to
speak
a
little
bit
about
our
personal
experience
with
Airbnb.
The
reason
we've
chosen
to
by
we
I
mean
my
uncle
has
a
house
in
he
does
Airbnb
in
his
basement.
I
have
recently
bought
a
house
with
the
help
of
my
parents
and
I
plan.
To
do
Airbnb
with
my
basement
is
because
for
us
physically,
it's
not
possible
to
have
long-term
tenants
in
this
space.
E
I
have
in-laws
visiting
my
in-laws
live
in
Kenya
and
when
they
come,
they
come
from
months
at
time.
It's
not
always
pre-planned
months
in
advance
and
I
am
NOT
able
to
have
a
long-term
tenant
tenant
in
my
basement.
I
bought
this
house
in
akut
August,
simply
with
the
budget
in
mind
that
I
can
short-term
rent
out
sorry
that
I
can
rent
out
on
a
short-term
basis.
For
when
my
in-laws
are
not
around.
We
also
have
very
large
family
gatherings,
and
when
we
have
family
coming
in
from
the
US,
it's
not
always
nice
to
be.
E
Like
hey,
go,
get
a
hotel
down
the
road,
if
that's
possible
instead
of
having
them
in
our
home,
but
as
you
guys
all
know,
homes
are
expensive
to
carry
and
our
houses
aren't
big
enough
to
support
our
family.
Around
I
also
feel
like
it
does
generate
a
lot
of
community
and
social
life
and
aspect.
So,
like
Maria
mentioned
a
chunk
of
my
uncle's
Airbnb
guests
are
neighbors.
Parents,
parents
want
to
come
visit,
they
don't
want
to
stay
through
the
winter
they'll
come
over
summer.
E
H
E
A
B
A
F
F
2015-2016
I
had
to
find
a
supplement
for
my
income
and
I
started
with
renting
my
second
bedroom
on
Airbnb
right
now,
I'm
doing
freelancing
with
this
very
difficult
economy
that
we
are
living
in
the
chemical
industry
and
because
it's
so
difficult
to
you
struggle
to
get
the
customer
and
the
client.
And
sometimes
you
need
to
travel
to
the
client
site
to
execute
the
project
and
the
reason
why
I'm
saying
this
is
in
even
though
I
salute
and
agree
with
most
of
the
recommendations
and
proposed
regulations.
F
J
A
K
Good
afternoon
mr.
chair
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
Richard
de
sam
lazaro
I'm
speaking
here
today
on
behalf
of
the
Expedia
family
of
brands,
including
vacation
rental
leaders,
home
away
vacation
rentals
by
owner.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity,
Expedia
and
home
way
are
supportive
of
all
five
guiding
principles
identified
by
city
staff
for
the
regulations
of
short-term
rentals.
In
particular,
we
recognize
that
even
though
Toronto
event,
rental
vacancy
rate,
was
much
lower
in
the
1990s.
The
availability
of
long-term
rental
housing
is
a
major
concern
for
the
City
Council
and
housing.
K
Affordability
in
Toronto
is
an
important
challenge.
Additionally,
the
City
Council
does
want
to
ensure
that
short-term
rentals
do
not
create
major
nuisances,
especially
with
regard
to
noise,
and,
although
we
agree
with
most
of
the
city
staff's
recommendations,
we
do
not
believe
that
they
have
struck
the
right
balance
when
it
comes
to
their
proposal
to
restrict
short-term
rentals
principal
residences.
In
fact,
we
believe
that
a
principal
principal
residence
restriction
excuse
me
would
be
in
direct
conflict
with
another
guiding
principle
identified
by
city
staff
to
enable
greater
diversity
in
tourism
accommodations.
K
We
also
note
that,
in
the
only
scientific
poll
commissioned
by
the
city,
67%
of
Torontonians
supported
allowing
short-term
rentals
and
secondary
residences.
So,
let's
be
frankly,
the
problem
with
short-term
rentals
is
not
related
to
secondary
residences.
Its
investors
purchasing
many
dwellings
in
a
single
condo
building
purely
for
conversion
into
short-term
rentals.
The
principal
residence
restriction
unnecessarily
risks
eliminating
a
type
of
accommodation
that
has
long
been
available
in
Toronto
for
traveling
families.
Traveling
families
want
kitchens
washing
machines,
separate
bedrooms,
amenities
that
are
not
available
and
affordably
in
hotels.
K
Moreover,
in
our
experience,
families
typically
want
whole
home
rentals
not
to
stay
in
someone
else's
house.
We
also
believe
that
a
principal
residence
restriction
would
make
it
more
difficult
for
families
to
visit.
Toronto,
therefore
harming
tourism.
So
to
achieve
the
balanced
outcomes
we
all
want.
We
seek
for
this
committee
to
replace
the
principal
residence
restriction
with
one
short-term
rental
license
per
person.
K
An
idea
noted,
if
not
endorsed
by
city
staff
in
their
report,
this
change
would
eliminate
the
current
problem
of
investors
buying
up
condos
entire
floors
of
condos
we're
conversion
into
short-term
rentals,
ensure
that
traveling
families
enjoy
a
diverse
choice
of
accommodation.
Safeguarding
Toronto
is
an
attractive
and
affordable
destination
for
families
and
be
much
easier
for
the
city
to
enforce
than
a
principal
residence
restriction.
We
believe
that
the
council
should
heed
the
2/3
of
Torontonians
who
support
short-term
rentals
in
a
secondary
residences.
Thank
you.
I
look
forward
to
any
questions.
F
But
when
the
second
stakeholder
meeting
came
along,
it
was
like
Open
Sesame
and
we
we
were
kind
of
reeling
with
the
impact
of
all
the
stakeholders
who
were
there.
We
also
were
we
asked
for
three
things
to
be
included
and
remedied
from
the
recommendations
that
they
brought
a
second
stakeholder
meeting.
First
of
all,
we
wanted
a
really
really
more
prescriptive.
F
We.
Our
second
thing
we
asked
for
we
asked
for-
was
that
to
make
it
known
that
the
contract
in
in
the
condo
act
actually
take
any,
and
the
rules
and
regulations
of
the
condominium
take
precedence
over
anything
that
the
that
the
city
may
define
and
I
think
we
asked
for
that
to
be
included
as
a
in
the
in
the
descriptions
are
in
the
regulation
that
to
be.
That
would
be
to
be
averted.
Of
that.
We
were
advised
that,
yes,
we
could.
F
We
could
put
something
in
that
was
more
severe,
but
we
could
not
be
do
anything
more
lenient
than
hardly
said
he
said
so
in
fact,
the
planner
at
that
meetings
verified
that
that
what
we
said
was
true.
The
third
thing
we
were
against.
We
wanted
to
have
it
removed
that
the
second,
the
secondary
Suites,
would
be
removed
from
the
option,
because
actually
they
were
planned
as
long
term
and
bobbly
his
time,
and
also
we
and
as
was
written
on
this
and
Veronica.
F
As
it's
written,
it
looks
like
you
could,
have
three
suites
a
secondary
plan
and
the
resident
in
place,
and
it
would
make
the
secondary
suite
would
not
would
become
the
main
suite
rather
than
the
subordinate
unit.
So
if
you
had
the
unit
at
the
unit
owner
a
one-bedroom
apartment
in
his
own
house,
you
could
have
the
three
suites
for
the
there
and
then
you
would
have
the
secondary
suite.
So
I.
Don't
think
that
is
written
correctly.
Thank.
A
You
thank
you
very
much.
Are
there
questions
of
the
deputy
not
seeing
any?
Thank
you
very
much
appreciate
you
coming
Melanie,
Ferreira
and
then
Paul
and
that
does
the
coat
was
Melanie
here.
I,
don't
see
Melanie
here,
Oh
Paul
knows
it
well,
I
knew
I
was
gonna,
Paul
I
knew
I
was
gonna
mess
it
up.
That's
why
I
repeated
Paul
three
times
how.
J
A
J
J
Excuse
me
I
want
to
thank
them
for
all
their
hard
work,
their
thoughtfulness,
that's
gotten
into
the
process
and
I
fully
support
current
proposed
regulations
as
they
stay
in
sorry.
I
get
him,
oh
so
because
it's
my
livelihood,
take
your
time
and
I
look
forward
to
adhering
to
and
respecting
the
proposed
Curtin
regulations
and
I
welcome
fire
inspection
building
inspectors
and
ESA
to
insure.
J
My
apartment
is
fully
compliant
to
all
codes
and
I'm,
hoping
that
when
this
all
goes
to
Council
that
the
current
proposed
regulations
and
because
I
think
a
lot
of
hard
work
and
a
lot
of
thoughtfulness
has
gone
into
addressing
the
issues
of
short-term
rental
in
the
city.
Having
worked
in
land
development
for
over
30
years
across
southern
Ontario,
I
think
they've
done
an
amazing
job
because
I
know
a
little
bit
about
the
housing
industry.
Thank
you.
J
Wholly
self-contained
separate
eases
pardon
me
covered
entrance,
separate
entrance,
yes,
and
how
many
days
a
year,
do
you
have
that
rented
out
for
the
last
four
years
we've
been
hosting?
It's
it's
been
occupied
a
good
part
of
the
time,
we're
not
your
typical
host.
We
had
a
lot
of
success
when
we
first
started
and
it's
evolved
not
not
because
we
wanted
it
to
go
that
way.
It
just
did
so.
J
I'll
talk
to
plate,
seven,
it's
occupied,
so
yeah,
okay,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
in
planning
for
our
future
of
the
ceiling
and
I
lost
our
jobs,
full-time
jobs
within
two
months
of
one
another
when
we
turned
52
to
corporate
downsizing,
so
we're
panicking.
What
are
we
gonna?
Do
my
daughter
introduced
the
stair
bein
because
she
uses
it
quite
extensively
to
travel
the
world,
so
we
started
doing
it
and
we
thought
why
didn't
we
do
this
sooner
and
we
used
to
rent
long
term.
Many
years
ago,
over
20
years
ago,
I
was
gonna.
J
Ask
about
that
yeah.
So
we've
been
in
our
house
for
32
years
when
we
first
moved
in
there,
because
we
were
starting
out.
We
lived
in
an
apartment
for
two
years.
We
saved
some
down
payment
and
we
we
look
for
eight
months.
This
is
back
in
1985
when
home
prices
doubled
inside
of
nine
months.
So
you
used
to
rent
it
out.
Yep.
J
J
No,
absolutely
not
it's
no
secret
that
short-term
rental
does
produce
more
income
for
a
host
and
does
long
term.
That's
not
a
secret
and
and
the
benefit
that
Lina
and
I.
I
have
no
pension.
I
have
no
drug
plan,
I
have
no
dental
plan,
so
the
additional
income
that
short-term
rental
does
provide
us
obsess
to
supplement
that.
Okay,
sure,
okay
and
because
I
have
no
pension
and
Lina
has
a
limited
one.
J
She
was
with
Bell
Canada
for
29
years
and
they
got
rid
of
her
whole
department,
so
she
lost
out
on
the
ability
to
work
to
gain
a
full
pension,
so
we're
really
behind
the
eight
ball
in
terms
of
preparing
our
future.
So
it's
our
intention
to
utilize
the
income
that
short-term
rental
provides
us
so
to
stay
in
our
home
in
age
in
place.
Okay,
thank
you
for
coming
today.
Thanks
for
the.
D
J
D
J
J
J
On
our
street
this
pass
last
year
we
attended
a
Christmas
party
at
the
other
end
of
the
street
and,
as
I
said,
we've
been
hosting
for
four
years
and
I
the
neighbors
we
were
at
that.
We
didn't
really
know
cuz
at
the
industry,
didn't
even
know
we
we
were
hosts,
they
attributed
to
the
different
vehicles
in
our
driveway
to
my
son.
Having
a
lot
of
friends.
I
said
no,
we
hoes
and
then
the
interest
evolved,
and
so
we
got
to
meet
more
and
more
neighbors
and
in
fact
they
love
what
we
do.
D
J
J
Four
years
ago,
we
needed
a
means
to
generate
additional
income
after
losing
our
career
jobs.
We
we
did
home
renovations
and
my
biggest
problem
is
age.
I
bought
my
mind
wants
to
do
it.
The
body
says
no
I
got
a
different
idea
for
you.
I
don't
want
to
do
it
anyway,
and
so
I
realized,
I
kind
of
I
got
to
find
alternative
ways
to
generate
income,
and
so,
although
short-term
rentals
does
produce
more
income
than
long-term,
it's
it's
not
like
everybody
on
their
streets.
L
A
J
Not
a
big
house,
our
hostess
920
square
feet
and
I
wouldn't
want
two
bedrooms
in
the
basement
because
it
would
be
really
cramped
and
and
not
a
comfortable
space
to
be
in
so
like
we
limit
our
basement
apartment
to
a
maximum
of
two
guests.
For
that
reason
itself,
because
part
of
this
is
you
know
if
we're
gonna
have
people
stay
in
our
basement?
There's
got
to
be
a
positive
experience.
It's
got
to
be
a
comfortable
experience,
so
I
would
say
it
wouldn't
be.
J
Something
I
would
consider,
and
would
we
consider
renting
our
upstairs
and
sharing
space,
Lina
and
I
know
that's
not
something
we
would
be
comfortable
doing
so.
The
basement,
because
it's
separate
from
our
living
space
is
a
good
fit
for
us
and
in
terms
of
not
putting
it
on
the
longer-term
market,
my
mother-in-law's
aging.
She
recently
lost
her
husband,
so
we
have
to
say:
okay,
how
long's
she
gonna
be
able
to
manage
on
her
own.
Do
we
have
to
bring
her
into
our
house
and
help
the
sister?
J
J
J
A
I
Hi,
my
name
is
Melissa
Goldstein
and
I.
Am
the
chair
of
a
group
called
housing
action
now
and
I'm?
Also
an
Airbnb
host
and
I've
been
an
Airbnb
guest
housing
action
now
is
a
coalition
of
Toronto
residents
and
community
organizations
that
advocates
for
safe,
decent
and
affordable
housing
for
all
for
on
Toni
ins.
Overall,
we
support
regulating
short-term
rentals
and
the
interests
of
protecting
both
the
city's
supply
of
long
term
rental
housing
and
the
affordability
of
rental
housing
across
the
city.
I
The
city's
vacancy
rate,
as
you
know,
is
notoriously
low
and
Torontonians
across
the
city
are
finding
it's
so
difficult
to
find
places
to
live
that
they
can
afford
that
homelessness
continues
to
rise.
Young
people
can't
afford
to
move
out
of
their
parents,
homes
and
people
across
the
city
of
so
few
options
that
they
end
up
stuck
and
unpleasant
and
unsafe
living
situations.
I
So,
while
the
city's
proposed
regulatory
framework
is
an
excellent
start,
we
think
that
there's
one
significant
issue
with
the
zoning
aspect
of
the
bylaw
that
must
be
addressed,
and
that's
that
we
think
short-term
rental
operators
should
not
be
permitted
to
rent
out
secondary
Suites.
Short-Term
rental
operators
should
be
limited
to
renting
out
their
principal
residence.
The
short-term
rental
of
secondary
Suites
seriously
undermines
the
city's
goal
of
protecting
long-term
rental
housing
stock
in
two
ways.
C
I
I
was
getting
I,
I
could
I
could
rent
out
my
place
for
a
couple
of
weeks
and
make
a
month's
worth
of
rent
to
pay
my
rent?
So
that's
how
much
more
my
place
was
was
being
valued
at,
and
that
has
an
effect
you
know
so
as
much
as
like
it
was
good
for
me.
At
the
same
time,
I
could
have
I
could
have
rented
it
out.
I
could
have
done
exactly
the
same
thing
and
earned
my
rent
without
it
being
as
high.
I
You
know,
so
it's
people
are
trying
to
get
as
much
as
they
can
and
I'm
just
suggesting
that
there's
some
there's
a
balance.
You
know,
like
our
rents
are
already
really
high,
so
the
idea
that
people
are
making
even
more
than
what
like
then
what's
being
charged
for
rent,
is
kind
of
ridiculous,
like
$4,000
a
month
for
a
one-bedroom
apartment
like
that's
how
much
you
can
make
on
Airbnb
or
more,
it's
kind
of
ridiculous
Thank.
C
I
A
A
I
I
didn't
rented
it
for
more
than
hundred
and
eighty
days,
and
the
thing
is:
is
that
I
mean
I
was
doing
what
was
possible
if
you
create,
if
he
changed
the
rules
and
I
would
have
done
something
else
right,
like
I
mean
this,
isn't
the
only
option
that
I
had
it
was
an
option
that
was
presented
to
me
that
I
took
advantage
of
that
worked
out
really
well,
you
know
like
thank
you,
multiple
things
you
can
do
to
pay
the
bills.
Thank.
A
M
You
very
much
I'm
with
fair
B&B,
which
is
a
coalition
of
workers.
Housing
advocates,
tenants,
homeowners,
residents,
associations,
condo
owners,
it's
a
it's,
a
broad-based
coalition
of
organizations,
groups
and
individuals
with
an
interest
in
establishing
fair
rules
around
the
emerging
short-term
rental
market.
M
That
has
a
long
history
of
being
supported
across
various
levels
of
government,
as
one
of
you
know
as
one
of
the
housing
strategies
to
address
affordable
housing
crises
in
the
City
of
Toronto
and
in
the
province
specifically
by
the
ministry
of
housing.
So
this
report
sort
of
lays
out
a
policy
background
and
objectives
around
the
secondary
suites
in
general
and
represents
our
concerns
about
the
current
proposal,
and
we
do
not
support
this.
M
M
Yeah,
certainly,
the
whole
regulatory
framework
hinges
on
the
notion
of
principle,
residency
requirement,
which
we
agree
with
it's
it's
an
important
step
to
ensure
that
people
actually
engage
in
the
practice
of
home
sharing
and
we
sort
of
eliminate
commercial
hosts
that
have
multiple
homes
that
buy
up
housings
condo
units
or
lease
or
run
portfolios
for
other
people.
But
as
it
stands
now,
the
city
asked
for
self
declaration
of
principal
residency
which,
for
us
is
you
know
not
good
enough,
because
you
know
it's
not
good
enough
for
me
to
say,
I
told
him.
M
Where
is
he
with
declare
that
this
princeless
address
is
my
principal
residence?
We
would
like
to
see
that
this
becomes
a
burden
of
proof
right
upfront.
If
a
host
desires
to
to
apply
for
a
permit,
they
should
be
showing
government-issued,
ID
or
a
government-issued,
ID
and
documentation
to
show
and
prove
upfront
that
this
is
municipal
address
is
actually
the
principal
residence
and
the
second
one
would
be
that
the
city
of
Chicago
has
established
a
condo
list
of
condominium
buildings
in
the
city
of
Chicago
that
is
prohibited
to
shorten
rentals.
M
There
are
about
seventeen
hundred
and
fifty
condos
that
are
on
that
list
in
Chicago,
where
condo
corporations
and
corner
boards
volunteer
to
submit
documentation
to
the
city
to
the
city's
short-term
rental
office.
To
say
our
condo
does
not
allow
short-term
rentals
and
these
buildings
are
off
limits
to
shorten
rental
companies
like
Airbnb,
and
it's
literally,
we
are
talking
tens
of
thousands
of
housing
units
that
are
protected
through
this
measure.
So
I
think
you
know
between
the
secondary
sweetpeas,
the
mandatory
requirement
for
principle,
residents,
proof
and
a
sort
of
list
of
prohibited
condos.
A
N
N
Okay,
so
I
just
thank
you
very
much
for
to
City
Council
for
hearing
me
out
and
all
the
staff.
This
is
my
first
deputation,
so
I'm,
pretty
passionate
about
this
subject.
I
wanted
to
kind
of
frame.
I
am
an
Airbnb
host,
but
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
frame
to
you
my
actions
very
unique
position
as
Airbnb
host
compared
to
others,
which
I
had
no
idea
about
I
started
hosting
three
years
ago,
and
I
wanted
to
talk
to
you
about
medical
students.
N
Anyone
that's
in
the
vicinity
of
a
hospital,
so
that's
University,
Hospital,
Roe
or
myself
in
Sunnybrook
Hospital,
would
would
be
providing
or
could
provide
a
place
for.
First,
medical
students
to
stay
in
my
case,
I,
have
hosted
over
30
medical
students
and
I,
have
taken
a
participation
and
very
proud
of
the
fact
that
I'm
helping
future
doctors
I
live
in
the
ward,
close
to
Yonge
and
Eglinton,
and
right
next
to
Sunnybrook
Hospital.
N
The
activity
happens
year-round
for
medical
students
to
be
staying
two
to
six
weeks.
In
my
my
suite,
my
suite
has
is
a
900
square.
I
have
a
semi
and
Leeside
900
is
a
900
square.
Feet
is
my
house.
They
have
a
separate
entrance
and
a
separate
bathroom
and
that's
where
they
do
out
most
of
the
times.
I,
don't
see
them
because
they're
out
24
hours,
because
they're
learning
how
to
be
or
to
be
a
doctor.
N
So
if
you
calculate
that
amount
for
a
medical
student
who's
already
paying
thousands
of
dollars,
that's
almost
close
to
nine
hundred
dollars
with
taxes,
one
thousand
nine
hundred
dollars
of
taxes
for
them
to
be
staying
for
two
weeks
in
order
to
complete
something
that
is
a
requirement
I
charge
and
I'm
very
happy
to
say,
I
charged
fifty
dollars
a
night
for
a
medical
student
on
top
of
that
I
provide
them
a
20
percent
discount
when
they
say
stay
longer
than
longer
than
a
week.
So
they're
getting
a
pretty
sweet
deal
in
between
I.
N
Do
host
I'm,
also
really
close
to
an
addiction
center
I
managed
I
have
the
privilege
of
hosting
families
that
are
there
to
support
their
loved
ones,
while
they're
going
through
addictions,
I
guess,
like
detox,
I'm,
also
close
to
Bloorview
kids,
we
have
so
families
that
have
to
travel
from
outside
of
Toronto
come
to
support
their
families
and
I'm
also.
So
those
are
the
three
main
medical
buildings
that
I'm
close
to
so
sort
of
the
question
I
have
is
when
we're
thinking
about
condos
and
limb
and
limitations
for
specifically
for
a
different
type
of
demographic
I.
N
Just
want
you
to
think
about
the
people
that
are
seeing
and
require
the
short-term
rentals
of
two
weeks
or
six
weeks,
because
a
price
for
soon
Sewickley
for
a
on
the
behalf
of
medical
students
would
be
exorbitant
for
them
to
be
staying
downtown
in
any
kind
of
hotel
and
really
the
all
they
need
is
a
place
to
stay.
Some
yeah.
N
N
A
N
A
N
N
A
N
N
N
L
So
just
trying
to
to
just
follow
up
on
those
questions,
so
sometimes
you
rent
on
Airbnb
for
up
to
like,
for
us
say
a
three-month
period
of
to
my
period.
Yes,
so
if
I
have
it
right
and
I'll
have
to
ask
the
staff
when
we
ask
questions
180
day,
restriction
is
only
for
short-term
rentals,
which
means
an
accumulation
of
rentals
that
are
28
days
or
less.
So,
if
I'm
correct
than
that
night,
I'll
have
to
verify
that
I
am.
L
L
L
A
E
Afternoon,
my
name
is
Carla
Parkinson
and
I've,
been
hosting
Airbnb
guests
and
our
principal
for
the
past
two
and
a
half
years,
I'm
here
today
to
add
my
voice
of
support
for
the
city's
proposal
to
allow
Home
Sharing
in
all
residential
areas
in
Toronto
in
2015,
my
husband
and
I
purchased
our
first
home
in
Toronto,
a
row
house
in
Little
Portugal,
where
we
currently
live
with
our
three-year-old
daughter
and
our
one-year-old
son.
When
we
purchased
our
home,
it
was
a
single
unit
dwelling.
E
The
basement
was
being
used
for
laundry
storage,
extra
rec
recreation
space
by
the
previous
owner.
She
was
not
renting
out
any
portion
of
home
to
long
term
or
short
term
tenants.
She
was
an
elderly
widow,
living
alone
in
a
three
three-bedroom
house.
So
when
we
purchased
the
home,
we
decided
to
renovate
the
basement
and
create
a
lawful
one-bedroom
one-bathroom
secondary
suite.
We
had
two
main
goals
for
that
secondary
suite.
E
Firstly,
the
majority
of
our
family
lived
more
than
an
hour's
drive
outside
drive
outside
of
the
GTA,
and
we
wanted
to
have
additional
space
in
our
home
where
we
could
comfortably
host
them.
Secondly,
when
family
or
friends
weren't
visiting,
we
wanted
the
ability
to
generate
additional
income
to
help
pay
our
mortgage,
and
so
Airbnb
has
been
the
ideal
solution
for
our
family.
Whenever
the
grandparents
announce
that
they're
coming
to
Toronto
just
about
time
with
the
kids
I
make
those
nights
unavailable
and
right
Airbnb
calendar
and
when
we
don't
have
family
or
out-of-town
guests
visiting.
E
I've
strict
rules
around
no
parties,
no
drugs,
no
smoking
and
because
we
live
in
the
house
with
our
children
and
I
make
sure
that
our
guests
know
that
we
live
there
with
our
children.
We've
never
had
any
issues
with
noise
or
parties.
I
supply
green
bin
and
recycling
bin
to
our
guests
so
that
they
can
participate
in
the
city's
waste
diversion
programs
and
in
the
two
and
a
half
years
that
I've
been
hosting.
E
We
continue
to
get
by
with
the
smallest
black
garbage
bin
provided
by
the
city
enclosing
the
ability
to
share
my
home
in
a
flexible
manner
we're
there
with
extended
family
friends
or
Airbnb
gasses
of
great
importance
to
me,
and
my
family
I
supported
the
city's
proposal
to
allow
Home
Sharing
for
an
unlimited
number
of
nights
when
renting
one
secondary
suite
in
a
primary
residents.
I
also
support
would
be
agreeable
to
paying
an
annual
registration
fee,
as
well
as
providing
my
emergency
contact
details
to
city.
Thank
you.
A
F
F
Right
now,
we've
helped
tens
of
thousands
of
families
stay
in
the
city,
and
these
families
need
a
lot
of
space
to
spread
out
in
I'm
talking
about
kitchens
common
at
congregation
rooms,
laundry
facilities,
parking,
you
name
it
that's
what
they're
looking
for
very
outside
the
box
around
from
a
hotel
as
someone
who
also
runs
an
out
of
the
cold
shelter
for
21
years
now,
I
am
very,
very
well
aware
of
the
housing
issue
in
Toronto.
The
long-term
housing
issue
in
Toronto
and
I
applaud
your
efforts
to
address
that
cause.
F
However,
preventing
homeowners
from
actually
renting
out
their
second
property
I
believe
will
not
help
solve
the
housing
issue.
Most
of
the
inventory
that
we
have
in
our
company
that
our
lot
that
our
short-term
rentals
would
fall
outside
the
word
affordability.
These
homes
are,
you
know,
they're
they're,
not
necessarily
the
ones
that
would
be
available
for
people
on
low
income,
housing
or
rental
that
have
rental
constrictions.
F
What
I
do
would
I
want
to
say
to
here
today
is
that
I
actually
support
the
draft.
That's
in
front
of
you
with
one
exception,
which
is
around
the
proposed
principal
residence
restriction,
so
excluding
secondary
residences,
we'll
have
a
number
of
significant
ramifications
as
I
look
at
it.
From
from
the
city's
perspective,
it'll
reduce
the
inventory
in
already
underserved
local
markets
in
Toronto,
so
my
husband
grew
up
in
Willow
Dell
and
whenever
his
family
came
to
visit,
there
was
nowhere
for
them
to
stay
in
in
will
Adele
outside
of
air
mattresses
on
their
floor.
F
If
you're
renting
there
you'll
spend
you
know
money
and
the
local
shops
on
ronsis,
Vale
and
Bloor
for
those
they
spend
money
and
look
in
their
local,
very
hyper
local
communities
and-
and
that's
a
really
beneficial
reason
to
allow
the
second
properties
to
be
rented
out
in
these
communities.
It'll
reduce
accommodation
options.
If
we,
if
we
don't
allow
second
properties
to
be
rented
and
it
will
I
think
in
my
case,
I
can
see
that
it
will
reduce
spending
in
those
local
communities.
So,
in
short,
I
do
agree
with
most
of
the
proposed
legislation.
F
A
A
Thank
you
thanks.
Then
I
have
Denise
flash
miss
Denise
here,
I,
don't
see
it
Denise
class,
so
I'm
looking
for
Danny,
slash
Jeremy,
do
you,
sir
Ralph
MacLeod,
don't
see
them
all?
That
is
the
end
of
our
deputies.
So
now
we
will
bring
it
into
a
committee.
There's
no
non
members
of
council
here.
Are
there
questions
of
staff
and
I
have
a
feeling
there
are
councillor
Campbell.
What's.
H
A
Well,
mr.
Phillips
I
don't
have
it,
but
you
got
it
from
our
clerks
yeah
and
we're
here
to
hear
from
everyone.
No,
you
don't
have
to
show
it
to
me.
I
will
believe
you
motion
to
allow
one
more
deputed
to
move
by
councillor
perks.
All
those
in
favor
I
was
carried
if
you've
been
here.
You
know
you
have
three
minutes
and
then,
if
you
have
questions
we'll
ask
them
from
you
so
again,
if
you
could
just
identify
yourself
would
be
great.
Thank.
O
O
The
use
of
homes
that
are
especially
specifically
used
as
short
term
rentals
will
be
a
substantial
loss
to
the
Toronto
Toronto
travel
industry,
business
travellers
and
trial
Toronto
residents
needing
emergency
and
their
temporary
housing
ribbon.
Removing
the
ability
of
families
coming
to
Toronto
for
short
period
to
work
for
to
vacation
work
or
a
potential
transition
is
an
extreme
measure
for
the
last
four
years,
I've
rented
out
my
hamp
home
to
families,
people
coming
to
Toronto
to
and
Toronto's
and
Torontonians
and
crisis
needed
needing
immediate
housing.
O
Our
home
gives
families
space
to
sit
around
the
dinner
table
at
the
end
of
their
day,
of
exploring
our
city
being
with
the
family
to
share
their
adventures
and
make
plans
for
the
next
day's
outings.
We
include
a
pack
and
play
chair
high
chairs,
stair
rail
guards
in
our
home
to
Welker
welcomed
younger
families
and
their
little
ones.
There
was
a
fire
last
year
on
Bathurst
Street,
near
Queen,
the
family
with
three
kids
were
homeless.
The
night
of
the
fire
I
got
a
call
from
the
dad.
O
The
next
morning
the
mom
was
cooking
breakfast
for
the
kids
and
dropping
them
off
to
school.
I
was
able
to
help
this
family
in
crisis.
It
seems
odd
that
it's
fine
to
rent
a
cottage
for
a
family,
but
not
a
house.
In
this
particular
cities,
Toronto
gets
14.3
million
overnight
travellers
a
year
dividing
14.3
by
365
days,
you'll
find
that
there
are
far
more
travelers
than
our
city's
home.
Hotels
have
room,
for.
There
are
a
hundred
and
three
one
hundred
and
eighty-three
hotels
with
close
to
36
thousand
rooms.
Doing
the
math.
O
We
assured
short
2356
rooms.
This
is
from
Wikipedia
I've
had
many
guests
staying,
they
have
never
used
Airbnb,
but
the
hotels
are
all
full
after
their
stay.
I
hear
about
many
have
been
believers
in
our
service
and
would
not
go
back,
would
not
go
back
to
a
hotel
with
the
recent
news.
Toronto
will
be
closing
eight
city
centre.
Hotels,
two
condos
has
nothing
to
do
with
Airbnb
hotels
have
not
kept
up
with
what
Millennials
want,
including
being
overcharged
for
what
they
do
not
want.
O
The
president
recommendation
offered
here
sound
very
much
dictated
from
the
US
hotel's
Lobby,
who
fund
fair
B&B,
with
an
annual
budget
of
5.6
million,
directly
spent
to
kill
this
mom-and-pop
business.
I
see
firsthand
how
guess
I'm
guess
how
they
love
ours:
okay,
I'm
gonna,
get
down
there.
I
received
a
few
months.
A
few
I
received
this
for
a
few
months
from
a
woman
from
Toronto
who
stayed
with
me
for
my
mom
excuse.
A
O
A
I
appreciate
that,
are
there
questions
of
the
deputed
not
seeing
any?
Thank
you
very
much
glad
we
could
accommodate
you.
Please
be
sure
the
staff
have
your
information,
and
now
we
were
going
to
go
questions
of
staff
from
members
of
committee,
but
I
see
a
member
of
counsel
and
a
colleague
of
ours
is
here
who's.
Not
a
member
of
the
committee
wants
to
ask
the
question
so
please
go
first
counselor
Matt
Lowe
Thank.
K
You
mr.
chair
I
just
have
one
question
with
regard
to
the
the
definition
of
primary
residence
and
also
the
ability
to
prove
that
one
is
saying
that
same
one
is
and
then
and
then
it
turns
out
that
it's
not
and
I
asked
this
because,
from
my
experience
as
a
local
counselor,
I've
already
had
a
frustrating
experience
with
a
childcare
that
has
opened
up
in
the
middle
of
a
residential
block.
I
think
we've
all
had
many
of
us
have
had
similar
experiences
and
well
we're
all
proponents
of
childcare.
K
Having
sort
of
an
institution
like
that
in
the
middle
of
a
residential
or
the
character
of
the
street
comes
with
it
a
lot
of
aggravation
for
the
local
residents,
whether
it
be
noise,
whether
it
be
privacy,
whether
it
be
parking
and
traffic
issues
etc.
So
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
you
need
to
do
to
be
able
to
have
as
many
spaces
as
you
want
there
if
they
had
exactly
the
number.
K
K
Are
we
having,
in
staffs
opinion,
trouble
right
now
enforcing
the
current
the
current
rules
and
then
is
there
something
else
that
we're
going
to
be
getting
I
heard
something
from
staff
earlier
about
a
different
criteria,
or
something
here
that
might
make
us
better
able
to
do.
I
know
that
that
folks,
were
my
boss,
understand
my
concerns.
I
just
wonder
so.
P
Through
you,
mr.
chair,
I'm,
sorry
I'm
not
completely
up
to
speed
on
the
issue
related
to
daycare
centers
and
the
enforcement
of
a
principal
residence
requirement
in
that
respect.
Okay,
I
think
if
we
are
involved
in
those
types
of
complaints-
and
it
would
be
a
review
of
the
zoning
permissions
but
unfortunately
I'm
not
prepared
to
speak
about
they
care
child
care
operations.
Oh.
K
Okay,
I
mean
I
use
that
as
an
example,
because
that
obviously
is
what
I'm
aware
of
but
I
mean
we
struggle
with
already
I'll
give.
You
know
we
struggle
with
enforcing
a
number
of
things,
whether
it
be
noise
by
law,
violations,
etc.
Where
people
are
told
somebody
will
come
in
five
days
and
you
never
know
what
you
know.
How
do
we
I
just
don't
assess
I
get
what
my
concern
is
that
I
don't
have
set
expectations
here
and
then
we
don't
have
the
ability
to
actually
do
what
we're
suggesting
we
do.
K
P
Through
you,
mr.
chair,
and
we
will
be
discussing
this
in
more
detail
in
the
report
tomorrow
at
licensing
and
standards,
because
the
requirement
for
principal
residences
resides
in
that
yeah
regulatory
scheme.
So
what
we've
tried
to
do
is
strike
a
balance.
I
mean
foundationally,
we're
saying
principal
residents,
because
we
don't
want
to
see
commercialization
of
residential
neighborhood
all
get
around
that.
At
the
same
time,
many
people
and
I
think
probably
all
you've
heard
today,
people
talking
about
wanting
to
be
able
to
comply
with
a
regulation
and
will
operate
in
that
in
that
manner.
P
So
we
start
from
that
point.
What
we
have
done
is
said
that
the
the
person
who
registers
we
have
to
have
a
registry.
They
must
declare
that
their
principal
residence
and
that
we
have
mechanisms
in
the
proposed
regulation
to
address
those
who
we
determined
are
not
operating
in
accordance
with
the
the
Declaration
of
Principles
that
they
have
made
and
the
tools
in
that
respect
relate
to
could
be
visits
and
actual
investigation
could
be
as
well
we've
required.
P
If
we,
the
executive
director
of
MLS,
can
require
or
proof
any
proof
as
it
we
deem
necessary
of
principal
residents
in
the
issue
where
we
have
a
belief
that
they
are
not
principally
residing
there.
So
you
know
we
have
put
more
focus
on
the
tools
to
deal
with
a
small
percentage
of
people
that
may
try
to
operate
outside,
of
compliance
with
the
bylaw
at
the
same
time,
not
making
it
overly
burdensome
for
the
most
of
the
people
that
will
comply,
there's
never
a
guarantee.
P
H
F
H
H
I
mean
Airbnb
lists
whether
or
not
there's
a
kitchen
I
presume
they
list
whether
or
not
there
is
a
kitchen
involved
with
the
rental
or
there
is
not
a
kitchen
and
other
sites
would
do
the
same.
Would
they
not?
Are
you
mister
chair
one
of
the
challenges
we
have
with
this
kind
of
definition?
Is
they
may
note
that
there's
a
kitchen
or
they
may
note
that
they're
sanitary
facilities,
but
whether
or
not
it's
been
they'll,
tour
or
permitted
in
terms
of
meeting
what's
required
from
fire
code
or
Building
Code
does?
H
P
So
through
you
mister
chair,
it
is
something
that
we
heard
about
and
was
discussed
at
the
executive
committee
when
we
were
when
we
brought
this
report
in
June
so
again,
notionally
on
the
foundation
of
principle
residents
and
noting
that
the
180
day
limit
route
would
apply
only
to
entire
unit.
Rentals,
not
home,
sharing
situations
entire
unit
rentals.
Only.
It
is
not
unreasonable
to
expect
that
a
person's
principal
residence
is
occupied
by
that
principal
resident
at
least
six
months
of
the
year
and
again
going
back
to
the
this.
P
P
L
Just
to
clarify
further
on
the
180
day
is
just
wanted
to
make
sure
I
gave
the
correct
answer
to
the
deputy
tent
that,
if
you
have
say
a
three
month,
rental
that
doesn't
count
as
part
of
your
hundred
and
eighty
days.
It's
a
hundred
eighty
days
is
an
accumulation
of
rentals
that
are
28
days
or
less.
Is
that
right
through
mr.
chair
perfectly
correct?
Okay,
thanks
on
the
the
renting
out
of
the
three
rooms?
So
if
you
rent
out
three
rooms
and
you're
in
a
house,
how
does
that
differ
from
having
a
rooming
house
so.
P
Through
you,
mr.
chair,
certainly
for
that
this
does
not
meet
the
definition
of
rooming
house
and,
as
the
definitions
were
crafted,
that
was
certainly
we're.
Mindful
of
that,
depending
upon
how
the
property
is
used,
they
may
fall
into
a
different
type
of
category
and
I've
got
my
colleague
from
well
from
planning
and
from
fire
can
speak
to
both
of
those
are.
H
You
mister
chair.
We
were
very
conscious
of
the
emerging
work
that
was
happening
on
multi
tenant
housing,
essentially
dealing
with
roaming
houses,
and
once
you
go
beyond
three
and
into
four,
we
were
what
we
were
taking
to
the
public
in
the
discussions
on
multi
tenant
housing
that
would
trigger
that
definition.
So
it's
purposeful
that
we
limited
to
three
here
so
that
we
kept
this
within
the
definition
of
short
term
rental.
C
L
H
You,
mr.
chair
I,
don't
have
a
number
on
the
number
of
basement
apartments
we
may
have
in
the
city.
I
can
tell
you.
There
are
based
on
the
latest
census,
information
and
other
work
that
our
research
and
information
group
does.
There
are
five
hundred
and
twenty
six
thousand
rental
units
in
the
city,
and
so
there
are
seventeen
hundred
and
fifty
nine
lawful
secondary
suites.
So
they
make
up
a
pretty
small
percentage
of
the
overall
rental
market
right,
but
how
many
units,
maybe
look
like
a
secondary
suite
but
may
not
have
been
permitted
as
such?
L
Right,
that's
what
I
was
looking
for
that,
because
people
think
that
secondary
suite
equals
basement
apartment,
but
it
doesn't
necessarily
secondary.
Suite-
is
a
more
of
a
legal
term
that
could
be
there
could
be,
there
could
be
1759
secondary
suites
and
there
could
be
50,000
basement
apartments
through.
H
You,
mr.
chair,
yes,
I,
mean,
if
you
back
out
purpose-built
rental,
social
housing
apartment
buildings,
condos
that
rent
you're
in
the
range
of
around
70,000
rental
units
in
this
city
that
fall
into
they
come
out
of
a
duplex
or
a
house
or
triplex.
Is
that
or
some
other
form
that
could
include
what
you
are
describing
right.
L
L
H
Or
through
you,
mr.
chair,
secondary
suite,
is
defined
in
the
zoning
bylaw
and
I
will
read.
It
means
self-contained
living
accommodation
for
an
additional
person
or
persons
living
together
as
a
separate
single
housekeeping
unit
in
which
both
food
preparation
and
sanitary
facilities
are
provided
for
the
exclusive
use
of
the
occupants
of
that
suite,
located
in
and
subordinate
to
a
dwelling
unit.
And
what
makes
this
definition
a
little
different
than
others
is
its
reference
to
an
additional
persons
or
persons
and
that
it
specifically
states
it
is
located
in
and
subordinate
to
the
dwelling
unit
and.
L
The
so,
if
you
have
say
we
were
to
say
no,
you
can't
use
secondary
Suites
for
short-term
rental
accommodation.
That
does
not
mean
you
can't
use
your
basement.
You
could
rent
out
your
basement
as
one
of
your
three
units
it
just
it
just
isn't
a
legal
quote/unquote
secondary
suite
through
you,
mr.
chair.
Yes,
that's,
that's
correct,
okay
and
and
and
someone
I
assume
can
help.
Q
A
Q
A
no
thank
you.
It's
interesting.
The
questions
that
councilor
fillings,
asking
and
I
might
elaborate
on
that,
but
the
the
secondary
suite,
if
I,
had
a
lawful
Sweden
in
my
home
and
I
rented
that
out
to
someone
on
a
long
term
basis,
is
that
lessee
allowed
to
then
take
that
suite
and
rent
it
out
on
Airbnb
through.
H
Q
Just
trying
to
figure
out
the
structure
of
a
secondary
suite
versus
the
basement
apartment
so
basement
apartment
I'm,
imagining
my
basement
apartment
private
entrance.
It's
got
a
little
kitchenette
full,
wash
room
bedroom
living
room,
I,
rent
it
out.
Should
that
be
a
secondary
suite
or
am
I
still
legally
conforming
to
the
rules
by
just
renting
it
out
as
a
basement
apartment.
Q
H
H
Q
Oh
I'm,
just
talking
a
basement
apartment,
that's
that's
complete
within
itself,
so
it's
got
the
it's
got
its
own
kitchen,
its
own
entrance,
a
bathroom
full
bathroom
and
a
bedroom.
So
it's
self-contained.
Do
I?
If
I
have
that
and
I'm
renting
that
out
and
it's
not
recognized
as
secondary
suite,
am
I
in
conformity
of
our
bylaws
or
not.
H
I3
mr.
chair
I
would
say
in
most
cases
you're
fine.
They
could
have
been
built
years
ago
at
the
time
they
were
built.
They
were
perfectly
legal
when
they
were
built.
They
may
not
be
the
same
requirements
today,
but
at
the
time
they
were
built,
they
were
fine,
so
it
continues
in
that
sort
of
grandfather
or
grandparent
equate.
So
in
most
scenarios,
yes,
you're,
fine,
we're
not
it's
not
a
question
of
a
bunch
of
illegal
apartments,
anywhere
right,
you're,
just
going
to
be
called
something
other
than
a
secondary
suite
and.
Q
P
So
through
you,
mr.
chair,
it's
certainly
not
one
of
those
items.
It
is
prominent
other
than
when
and
as
Michael
mitzi
explained,
there's
so
many
different
combinations
and
permutations
of
the
way
properties
are
being
used.
We
do
find
where
we
get
complaints
where
there
are
allegations
of
illegal
rooming
houses
that
in
some
instances
or
many
instances
they
are
not
actually
operating
as
rooming
houses
by
those
definitions,
but
they
are
rather
people
living
in
different
types
of
conditions
within
the
same
property.
P
So
to
say
that
I've
got
you
know,
and
certainly
we
can
look
at
the
information
and
respect
to
zoning
complaints
that
we
receive,
but
generally
our
zoning
related
complaints
do
do
Bly
to
how
the
individual
property
is
used
and
and
how
people
are
occupying
that
space
and
whether
that
occupancy
triggers
a
specific
definition,
either
in
zoning
building
or
fire.
So,
unfortunately,
it's
not
a
simple
answer:
right:
okay,.
P
P
A
P
To
you,
mr.
chair,
actually,
the
Residential
Tenancies
Act
does
not
specify
a
tenancy
period
and
more
as
the
discussion
we're
just
having
it
speaks
to
the
tenancy
use
or
the
type
of
tenancy.
So
we
have
chosen
the
28
days
as
a
definable
term.
The
RTA
speaks
to
any
residential
unit,
and
then
it
has
exclusions
from
the
RTA,
so
the
exclusions
are
defined
by
use
and
there,
such
as
context
to
this
discussion,
hotels,
motels,
tourist,
home,
bed-and-breakfast,
vacation
establishment
or
vacation
home
are
the
types
of
residential
uses
or
that
do
not
attract
the
perfekt.
P
P
Nature
of
the
tenancy
is
a
longer
well,
I
guess
is
a
longer
term
rental,
even
though
long
term
is
not
defined.
It
simply
says
a
residential
tenancy
is
protected
under
the
RTA
and
there
are
a
number
of
types
of
tenancy
like
transient
tendencies
that
are
excluded.
So
you
know
we're
hearing
about
people
saying
I,
rent,
a
property
or
rent
my
place
for
three
months
in
a
row
to
a
student
six
months.
P
A
Would
someone
like
the
woman
who
was
here
renting
to
medical
students
that
had
to
go
to
work
in
a
hospital
if
they
rented
it
on
a
daily
basis
and
they
kept
renewing
the
agreement?
Then
they
would
end
up
going
over
28
days.
So
they
wouldn't
necessarily
follow
our
regulations,
but
they
may
not
fall
under
the
residential
tenancy
act
because
they
were
visiting
students
who
originally
came
in
to
rent
for
a
shorter
period
of
time.
So.
P
Through
you,
mr.
chair,
what
I
would
say
in
our
discussions
with
the
province,
you
know
the
RTA
was
drafted
some
time
ago,
and
this
type
of
transient,
short-term
rental
tenancy,
wasn't
necessarily
contemplated,
though
I
would
argue
in
the
context
of
hotel-motel
tourist
home
bed-and-breakfast,
these
types
of
references
being
excluded,
it
was
contemplated.
It
doesn't
speak
to
the
manner
in
which
people
pay
their
rent,
so
the
student
that
may
choose
to
pay
daily
I
think
that
would
be
a
matter
that
could
reasonably
fall
under
the
landlord
and
tenant
board,
jurisdiction
and
I.
P
H
Through
to
mr.
chair,
just
would
add
that
choosing
less
than
28
days
was
not
accidental
was
very
purposeful,
and
the
reason
for
that
was
that
we
didn't
want
this
definition
to
apply
to
rental
that
are
consistent
with
the
length
of
a
month,
because
we
wanted
it
to
be
separate
from
monthly
and
longer
term
residential
rental.
We
knew
this
topic
when
we're
all
at
our
most
alert
was
going
to
be
a
difficult
topic
to
explain.
A
A
C
C
H
H
G
C
C
H
D
H
D
H
D
D
H
D
H
D
P
Okay,
three
mister
chair,
but
I
think
that
again
it
goes
back
to
there's
a
lot
of
different
scenarios.
While
it
may
not
be
a
lawful
secondary
suite,
the
two
bedrooms
in
the
basement
could
rear
antenna
rented
out
as
head
rooms
in
the
basement,
exactly
rented
on
short
term
rental
basis.
As
a
couple
of
those
bedrooms
that
are
permitted
in
a
principal
residence,
exactly
exactly
okay,.
L
H
L
L
Fifty-Thousand
basement
units
in
the
city
that
have
a
washroom
and
a
kitchen
if
they
haven't
been
deemed
a
secondary
suite
by
virtue
of
the
owner,
going
and
complying
with
all
the
regulations
which
we
know
only.
Seventeen
hundred
and
ninety
two
people
have
done.
Therefore,
it's
not
a
secondary
suite.
H
Through
mr.
chair,
that
is
correct,
and
that
would
probably
be
quite
common
because
lots
of
people
don't
go
and
get
those
permits,
and
some
of
the
challenges
relate
to
requiring
contractors
to
enlarge
an
escape
window
or
some
other
measure
to
make
it
meet.
All
the
requirements
to
be
lawful
and
once.
H
L
The
fire
door
and
then
not
a
secondary
suite
anymore-
that's
correct
yeah,
so
it
just
like
we're
kind
of
chasing
our
tail
a
bit
on
the
whole
secondary
suite
aspect
of
this.
The
so
if
you
are
renting
out
a
separate
dwelling
unit,
so
so
I
rent
a
basement
whether
it's
a
secondary,
suite
or
not
I
rent
a
basement.
It
becomes
a
dwelling
unit
by
virtue
of
the
fact
I
rented
it
out
correct.
H
H
L
Unit
we
talked
about
circumstances
so
let's
say
so
just
to
pick
to
example,
secondary
suite
and
I'm
sorry
to
belabor
this,
but
it
is
fascinatingly
complex
and
we
do
need
to
understand
it
if,
on
the
one
hand,
if
it's
a
secondary,
suite
and
I'm
renting
it
I
can
then
rent
out
units
within
that,
if
I'm
living
there
correct
it's.
My
dwelling
unit.
H
L
H
L
H
C
L
P
Mr.
chair,
this
has
been
a
very
helpful
exercise.
I
would
say
because
it
certainly
articulated
the
challenges
that
we
have
in
how
people
are
are
using
property.
You
know
and
really,
and
that's
where
it
also
makes
it
very
difficult
to
say
well.
This
is
how
we
enforce
this,
because
we
end
up
with
a
variety
of
different
types
of
uses.
Some
permitted
in
certain
sank
circumstances
some
permitted
in
others,
some
of
them
not
at
all,
and
some
of
them
completely
right.
P
So
your
example
about
the
person
who
owns
a
property
and
rents
three
rooms
they
rented
out
their
base,
their
secondary
suite
to
a
tenant
who
then
also
wants
to
participate
in
a
short-term
rental
basis
and
rents
out
three
bedrooms
would
be
lawfully
permitted
by
the
construct
that
we
have
here.
So
you
know
the
I
guess.
P
And
so.
For
that
reason,
though,
it
is
on
a
case-by-case
basis
investigated,
as
as
the
the
circumstances
present
themselves.
That
is
how
we
are
anticipating
a
primarily
complaint
based.
However,
what
we
have
have
been
developing
and
going
to
continue
to
develop
is
also
more
proactive
audit
approach.
So
where
we
have
situations
that
may
be
identifying
a
need
for
us
to
dive
in
further
to
determine
principal
residences
or
potential
over
occupation
or
over
over
capacity
of
premises,
then
we
have
the
mechanisms
to
do
that.
A
Of
committee
I
think
we're
going
around
and
around
with
lots
questions
like
we're
nine
minutes
on
one
group
and
I.
Don't
think
we're
actually
gonna
figure
this
out
completely.
So
if
you
have
some
short
questions,
you
can
do
and
then
what
I
would
suggest
with
the
staff
hearing
all
this
and
they're
gonna
have
another
deaf
group
of
deputations
at
another
committee.
Hopefully
they'll
have
some
ideas
to
help
us
out
when
it
comes
to
counseling.
We
start
asking
the
questions
all
over
again,
a
counselor
by
little
questions.
O
D
A
D
O
O
Q
P
O
F
2000,
when
secondary
Suites
came
into
the
zoning
bylaw,
they
were
permitted
through
building
permits.
They
were
brought
in
to
the
requirements
through
building
permits
or
through
a
protocol
with
fire
inspection
and
municipal
and
licensing
inspections.
So
if
they
passed
the
fire
and
through
municipal
licensing,
they
could
become
secondary,
Suites
I
think
once
they
meet
the
requirements
of
the
Ontario
Building
Code
and
the
provision
of
the
zoning
bylaw,
they
can
remain.
Second
Suites
people
can
use
them,
then,
for
whatever
they
choose
to
once
they
no
longer
need
that
secondary
suite.
F
Q
Thank
you
and
so
one
last
question:
the
under
the
zoning
proposal
people
could
rent
up
to
three
bedrooms:
one
secondary
suite
in
an
entire
home,
so
I'm,
unsure
of
why
we
have
a
cap
of
up
to
three
bedrooms.
If
an
entire
home
has
five
bedrooms,
are
they
not
allowed
to
run
for
five
bedrooms
or
four
of
them.
H
A
If
you
can
just
help
me
clarify,
one
of
our
deputies
was
renting
his
basement
out
on
a
regular
basis,
and
it
was
a
secondary
suite
now
from
what
I
heard.
Therefore,
he
would
fall
into
the
regulations
that
could
only
rent
it
for
180
days
maximum
because
he's
living
upstairs
that's
what
this
is
proposing
am
I,
correct.
P
P
Done
so
through
you,
mr.
chair
and
Paul
and
Lina's
circumstance
I
they
they
could
continue
to
do
what
they
are
doing
for
365
days
of
the
year
as
the
owner
of
the
property
of
the
principal
residence,
the
secondary's
lawful,
secondary
suite.
They
are
permitted
to
operate
at
365
days
a
year
if
they
vacated
the
property
and
rented
the
entire
unit.
A
A
P
Three
of
mr.
chair
and-
and
this
has
been
the
balance
right-
some
some
jurisdictions
have
applied
a
cap
across
every
type
of
rental
use.
What
we've
said,
because
we
founded
this
in
principal
residence
and
the
notion
of
home
sharing-
is
that
this
is
the
place
where
you
live,
and
there
are
portions
of
the
property
that
you
want
to
offer
on
short
term
rental
or
when
you
may
be
away
from
your
property
for
up
to
six
months,
you
could
offer
it
for
short
term
rental.
That's
the
premises.
P
I
mean
we've
gotten
into
a
lengthy
discussion
about
how
we're
carving
up
those
portions
of
the
property,
but
the
the
foundational
principle
is
it's
your
principal
residence.
You
are
offering
portions
of
that
property
on
a
short-term
rental
basis,
up
to
three
bedrooms:
portions
and/or,
a
secondary
suite
portion-
and
that
is
that
is
permissible
by
the
proposed
regulation
365
days,
if
you
have
vacated
and
have
offered
the
entire
unit.
It's
your
principal
residence,
but
you
are
vacating
it.
You
know
for
an
example-
and
this
is
where
I
disagree
with
the
notion
around
not
supporting
for
families.
P
So
if
you
wanted
to
offer
your
home
in
an
entire
unit
up
to
the
180
days
a
year,
that
is
a
three-day
weekend,
52
weeks
of
the
year
plus
so
there's
still
people
who
may
want
to
go
to
their
cottage
in
the
in
the
summer
weekends
and
offer
their
home
in
the
City
of
Toronto
on
a
short-term
rental
basis.
They
can
do
that
up
to
180
days.
They
cannot
do
it
up
to
365
by
this
proposal
on.
P
Portions
of
the
home
of
your
principal
residence
365,
so
it's
permissive
to
allow
for
the
way
the
home
sharing
economy
has
evolved.
Is
that
notion,
you're,
sharing
a
portion
of
your
premises,
whether
that
premise,
that
portion
be
rooms
in
the
space
that
you
occupy
or
a
lawful
secondary
suite
within
your
property?
But
where
you
are
where
you
are
offering
the
entire
unit
that
we
that's?
Where
we've
proposed
180
days,
question.
A
Of
our
building
divisionist
Indiana,
if
we
have
restrictions
and
don't
permit
secondary
suites,
because
we're
concerned
that
they
will
come
off
the
long
term,
rental
market
and
people
that
don't
still
want
to
rent
those
basements.
Is
there
a
concern
or
might
there
be
a
concern,
then
that
they
wouldn't
make
them
legal
secondary
suites
and
not
apply
for
the
permits
to
do
that,
because
if
they
did
they'd
be
identified
as
a
secondary
suite
and
subject
to
different
regulations
of
not
being
able
to
rent
them.
F
A
N
A
O
A
The
the
one
of
the
motions
that
may
come
forward
is
to
not
allow
secondary
Suites
to
be
rented
period
on
short
term
rental.
So
my
concern
is,
if
we
say
that
yeah
does
it
mean
that
people
won't
apply
for
a
permit
and
they
will
just
build
it
and
therefore
our
fire
department
and
your
billing
department
doesn't
inspect
it
and
they've
created
a
suite
and
are
renting
a
short
term,
but
because
we've
never
inspected
it,
they
won't
fall
under
the
bylaws.
Well,.
F
A
I
think
you
understand,
maybe
our
fire
department
stands
where
I'm
coming
from
yeah
I
did
try
to
look
if
I
bring
in
a
regulation
to
permit
one
thing
by
trying
to
bring
in
a
regulation
to
not
permit
them
to
be
short-term
rental.
Are
we
then,
looking
at
the
fact
that
people
may
avoid
making
them
secondary
Suites
and
still
do
it
anyways?
So.
P
So
to
you,
mr.
chair,
you
know
absolutely
I
mean
I
would
say
the
fact
that
the
city
has
identified
1,700
lawful,
secondary
suites
people
are
already
not
coming
into
the
city
for
the
appropriate
permits
and
inspections.
Unfortunately,
some
people
choose
to
operate
outside
of
the
law.
I
think
the
foundation
here
is
and
and
well
said,
our
concern
needs
to
be
whether
you
call
it
a
secondary
suite,
a
basement
apartment,
a
ancillary
whatnot
that
the
Foundation's
around
the
protections
of
life
safety
under
the
building
code
and
the
fire
code
have
to
be
adhered
to.
P
So
we
have
people
living
in
conditions
that
are
completely
substandard
and
inappropriate.
This
is
part
of
our
issue
with
the
multi
tenant
housing
problem,
the
rooming
house
issue.
So
is
it
possible
that
people
might
choose
to
find
a
way
to
circumvent
the
law?
Yes,
are
they
doing
so
at
their
own
peril?
Absolutely.
Is
it
something
that
we
are
endorsing?
Absolutely
not
you
know,
but
we
haven't.
We
have
very
difficult
balances
here
right.
We
want
people
to
comply.
P
We
want
to
make
sure
the
rules
are
easily
easy
to
comply
with,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
things
are
done
lawfully
safely,
whether
this
would
add
to
an
issue
or
compound
an
issue
of
people
being
non-compliant.
I,
don't
think,
that's
it's
a
state,
a
Nance,
a
question
that
we
could
answer
if
this
would
cause
people
to
not
more
or
less
sorry,
I
just
got
on
a
soapbox
about
fire
safe.
So.
A
C
A
line
of
questioning
which
I
intended
to
get
to
earlier
and
forgot
about
because
my
head
hurts
it's
a
noodle
up
there
I
know
broken
noodle
today.
If
I
am
operating
an
airbnb
unit,
I
have
never
applied
to
make
it
a
secondary
suite
or
paid
a
development
charge
on
it.
I
have
never
had
a
fire
inspection
to
see
whether
my
bed
sitting-room
meets
code.
I
have
never
done
any
of
those
things.
Am
I
operating
outside
the
law
today.
P
C
On
XYZ
Street
said:
X
Y,
Zed,
Street,
you've
really
fried
me
up
here
today.
Mr.
chair
I'm,
on
X
Y
Zed
Street
in
the
middle
of
a
residential
area,
I've
never
paid
a
development
charge
for
a
second
unit.
I
have
never
had
a
fire
inspector
in
on
my
bed.
Sitting-Room
I've
never
done
anything
like
that.
I
just
decided
one
day,
I
would
start
renting
out
part
of
my
house
through
our
B&B.
Am
I
operating
outside
along
through.
C
H
A
P
A
I
would,
in
seriousness
all
the
deputation
tell
the
members
were
gonna
go
to
speakers
now,
whatever
we
have
asked
or
whatever
it
is
I
think
it
might
be
helpful
to
you
to
get
ready
for
the
same
type
of
understanding
for
the
rest
of
our
colleagues
at
Council
and
maybe
have
some
of
those
answered
in
a
presentation
when
you
start
off.
If
you
can
speak
with
the
mayor
about
that
and
see
if
we
could
arrange
that
our
speakers
non
members
of
the
committee.
Thank
you,
members
of
the
committee
councilor
bi-lo,.
D
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
I,
do
have
a
motion
that
I'd
like
to
place
and
I'd
like
to
start
by
thanking
staff,
but
I'd
like
to
thank
the
deputies
that
came
here
today
and
the
short-term
rental
companies
that
have
been
involved
in
this
process
for
a
long
time
and
have
been
at
the
table
and
giving
feedback
and
and
working
with
staff.
To
find
this
balance.
It's
not
easy,
but
I
think
we're
very,
very
close.
I
think
I
truly
believe
that
there
is
a
space
in
our
city
for
short-term
rentals.
D
I
do
believe
that
it
done
right.
It
can
help
residents.
It
can
help
the
tourism
industry.
It's
it's
a
good
experience,
I
believe
to
to
the
hope
the
hosts
from
what
I
hear
from
what
I
hear
people
saying
people
feel
proud,
I
believe
they're
great
hosts
to
host
people
in
here,
but
I
think
that
we
have
to
stay
true
to
what
Tracy
call
the
foundational
principle
of
this
legislation,
and
that
is
that
it
needs
to
be
maintained
in
somebody's
primary
residence.
We
need
to
ensure
that
whatever
could
be
somebody's
primary
residence
is
maintained.
D
As
that,
we
have
an
extremely
unhealthy
vacancy
rate
in
this
city.
If
you
are
a
renter
trying
to
find
an
apartment
to
live
in
the
city,
it
is,
it
is
a
really
bad
experience.
It's
it's
it's
frustrating
is,
is
desperate.
People
are
really
having
a
tough
time,
and
obviously
it
has
an
impact
on
rents
if
you're
a
homeowner
the
same
thing,
and
that's
why
it
has
to
balance
that
support
that
you
might
get
from
having
some
of
the
short-term
rental
opportunities
through
the
bedrooms
through
being
away
through
your
lifestyle.
D
You
should
be
given
that
opportunity,
but
if
there's
a
dwelling
unit
or
a
secondary
unit
that
could
be
somebody's
home
one
of
your
neighbors
home,
we
need
to
make
sure
that
it
continues
to
be
that
way.
So
the
thousands
of
people
that
live
in
secondary
units
in
this
city
that
they
are
allowed
to
be
that
we're
working
very
hard
here
at
the
city,
for
example,
to
bring
even
other
sources
of
of
units
we're
working
on
laneway
housing,
so
people
are
able
to
create
laneways
Suites.
Why?
D
Because
we
know
that
we
don't
have
enough
rental
in
this
city,
the
province
in
their
affordable
housing
plan
they
talked
about
secondary
suite,
has
a
housing
policy
as
a
way
of
creating
housing.
We
know
that
the
the
family
sizes
are
decreasing
in
our
city,
so
there
is
space
in
the
U
in
the
houses
that
we
have
as
we
have
them.
There
are
spate.
There
are
space
that
could
be
available.
There
is
out
there
that
is
built
that
needs
to
be
made
available
for
people's
housing
and-
and
we
are
creating
incentives
for
that.
We
are
created.
D
The
province
is
creating
incentives
for
for
people
to
create
secondary
seats
to
put
on
the
long
term
rental
market.
We
consider
this
as
part
of
the
long
term
rental
market,
so
I
I
hope
that
I
can
get
this.
The
support
from
from
from
my
colleagues
here,
like
I,
said
I
do
support.
I,
think
that
is.
That
is
time
that
we
legislate
this
bank.
We
are
behind
a
lot
of
cities.
Vancouver
just
did
it
yesterday.
D
They
didn't
allow
secondary
suites
again
they
they
have
pretty
much
the
same
issue
as
we
do
a
very
unhealthy
low
vacancy
rate
and
and
so
I
think
we
need
to
to
adopt
the
report.
We
need
to
create
the
regulation.
We
need
to
give
certainty
to
the
hosts
to
the
industry.
To
so
the
renters
that
that
are
in
some
of
these
Suites
are
in
thinking.
D
You
know,
what's
gonna
happen,
am
I
am
I
gonna
get
a
notice,
because
my
landlord
is
gonna,
think
that
they
probably
can
make
more
money
and,
in
the
short
term
rental,
and
so
we
need
to
give
certainty
to
to
Torontonians
I
think
we
need
to
move
forward
with
with
regulations
and
I
think
there's
a
little
bit
of
fine-tuning.
This
is
what
I
am
proposing
and
I
hope
to
get
your
your
support
to
to
get
this
through.
C
C
Now
that
it
has
been
clarified
for
me
that
that
we
actually,
there
are
legal
tools
available
for
closing
down
these
operators,
whether
we
develop
this
report
or
not,
that
would
be
my
preferred
way
to
go
listening
to
the
way
that
Airbnb
overplayed
their
hand.
Today
was
all
I
needed
to
have
my
view
that
this
is
not
a
healthy
contribution
of
the
Toronto
economy
or
society
or
housing
crisis,
or
anything
like
that.
I
mean
listening
to
the
way
they
talked
about
it
before
air
and
B
air
B&B.
C
Nobody
could
afford
to
travel
to
the
City
of
Toronto.
Nobody
could
visit
their
family.
Nobody
could
afford
to
own
a
home.
Local
business
was
all
teetering
on
the
brink
of
collapse,
but
magically
because
of
the
the
great
addition
air
B&B
has
made
recently
the
Toronto
economy
and
and
all
of
our
citizens
and
relatives
are
now
saved.
I
don't
buy
a
word
of
it.
People
did
travel,
they
did
visit
their
families,
they
did
buy
homes,
local
business
did
thrive
and
survive.
C
None
of
none
of
these
outcomes
have
anything
to
do
with
with
Airbnb
and
further
the
way
that
they
persist
and
insist
on
miss
describing
what
it
is
they
do.
Fundamentally,
they
are
not
about
sharing.
There
have
nothing
to
do
with
sharing.
They
are
for-profit
business
about
renting,
renting
land
temporarily
or
a
long
term
or
whatever
the
rental
of
land
has
been
with
us
forever.
There
is
nothing
new
or
exciting
in
this.
C
The
only
thing
that's
different
about
this
and
where
things
would
have
been,
for
example,
in
Parkdale,
where
people
build
all
kinds
of
illegal
units
all
through
the
60s
and
70s,
the
only
thing
different
between
them
and
what
happened
in
those
days
is
in
those
days
the
ad
was
placed
in
a
newspaper.
Now
it's
placed
on
your
smartphone
there's
no
revolution
here,
there's
nothing
disruptive,
it's
just
another
private
company
trying
to
profit
off
a
hole
in
the
way
that
we
regulate
our
housing
market
without
without
following
the
law.
C
There's
scofflaws
just
like
the
way
car2go
are
telling
customers
to
park
illegally
on
our
streets
and
whoever
came
and
operated
illegally.
These
guys
are
not
innovators,
they
are
just
pirates
and
I'm,
sick
and
tired
of
having
to
give
up
on
important
pieces
of
public
policy
that
benefit
Torontonians.
Because
somebody
wrote
a
book
about
the
sharing
economy,
it's
just
insufficient.
We
have
regulatory
systems
in
place
to
protect
neighborhoods.
We
have
regulatory
systems
in
place
to
make
sure
people
don't
die
in
fires
and
in
appropriately
design
units
we
have
systems
to
house
people.
C
We
have
these
these
tools.
All
these
guys
are
doing,
is,
is
trying
to
eat
a
free
lunch
outside
the
regulatory
scheme.
I
won't
have
any
more
of
it
and
as
to
this
business,
about
how
this
helps
people
age
in
place.
This
is
the
single
most
telling
part
of
it.
I
own
a
home.
If
you
allow
me
to
operate
an
Airbnb
unit,
I
can
age
in
place.
C
L
Thank
you.
One
simple
motion
that
the
chief
planner
and
executive
director
city
planning
be
requested
to
report
directly
to
City
Council
on
December
6
2017
if
they
wish
to
clarify
or
modify
any
recommendation.
So
it's
only
if
they
want
to
I
didn't
include
Tracy
cut
because
you're
reporting
to
a
different
committee
tomorrow,
but
otherwise
would
have
included
you
and
that
as
well,
I
mean
I,
think
clearly,
city
regulations
need
to
keep
up
with
change
and
I.
A
Thank
you,
I'll
speak
on
it.
First
of
all,
I
will
move
the
staff
recommendations
and
the
report
that's
in
front
of
us
I.
Think
day's
discussion
was
one
that
showed
that
the
Internet
and
the
new
economy
is
really
changing
the
way
that
life
goes
on
across
the
city
and
around
the
world,
because
the
newspaper
ad
was
something
someone
could
see
before
in
Toronto
if
they
wanted
to
rent
a
house.
A
A
It
may
not
be
safe
or
that
someone
just
finds
a
way
around
it,
because
we
were
told
that
you
know
our
deputy
and
over
here
that
rents.
A
second
suite
three
hundred
and
sixty
days
a
year
can
continue
to
do
that.
So
I
I'm
staff
has
worked
very
hard
on
this.
They've
tried
to
get
some
answers,
I
think
we
owe
it
to
them
and
to
the
people
of
the
city
to
move
this
on
to
Council,
to
how
the
debate
and
the
questions
there,
let
council
make
its
determination
whether
it
wants
to
support
these
regulations.
A
I
think
should
we've
done
it
before
with
other
types
of
areas
that
are
now
into
the
new
and
the
shared
economy
and
I
think
it's
incumbent
upon
us
to
do
that,
whether
you
call
it
sharing
or
helping
or
whatever
it
is
people
are
doing
it.
So,
let's
not
close
our
eyes
close
our
ears
and
say
nothing
with
our
mouth
to
try
and
get
this
moving
forward.
Let's
be
proactive
instead
of
reactive.
A
A
A
L
A
Members
of
the
committee
committee-
members,
hello,
can
you
please
take
your
discussions
outside
counselors
before
you
go?
We
had
it
counselor,
perks,
counselor,
perks.
Sorry,
we
have
Midtown
of
focus
which
our
colleague
is
here.
There's
deputy
ins,
we
have
the
townhouse
and
low-rise
apartment
guidelines.
There's
no
speakers.
It's
a
timed
item.
I'd
like
to
move.
Yes,
oh.
A
C
B
A
A
A
A
So
we're
gonna
hear
from
you
Blaine.
We
have
five
minutes.
I
have
to
go
out
of
the
room
for
me
to
last
my
colleague,
counselor
Deanna.
If
he
can
just
chair
councillor,
Barlow
is
here
so
we
still
have
quorum.
I
saw
a
counselor
filling
in
here
a
moment
ago.
Where
did
counselor
Fillion?
Oh,
that
was
quick.
A
Q
L
L
The
second
one
is
that
the
city's
cow
or
the
parks
capital
planning
process
consider
the
fact
that
a
large
portion
of
the
park
is
being
used
by
Metrolink
now
and
must
be
refurbished
and
they're
refusing
to
consider
that
as
part
of
their
capital
planning
allowance,
which
is
going
to
cost
a
couple
hundred
thousand
dollars.
The
next
thing
is
we're
asking
that
the
a
Clinton
Park
dog
owners
association
be
given
status
in
the
participation
formally
and
about
the
same
footing
as
residence
groups.
L
Up
to
this
point,
there's
been
no
consultation
with
dog
owners
and
we've
been
how're.
We
logged
out.
The
final
thing
is
that
the
original
2012
parks
planning
process
for
this
had
two
time
horizons,
2020
and
sort
of
beyond
we're
asking
that
our
proposal
be
included
within
the
2020
timeframe.
Given
the
urgency
of
the
population
increase.
L
If
I
can
illustrate
why
we're
concerned
and
what
these
concerns
are
about,
sir
you'll
notice
in
the
image
with
the
yellow
strip
at
the
bottom-
that's
where
we're
proposing
putting
a
dog
area
off
leash
and
on
the
right
side,
the
image
is
the
Metro
links
yard,
that's
being
used
for
crosstown
construction.
That
site
must
be
refurbished,
meaning
that
the
dog
park
can
be
built
at
minimal
cost.
L
However,
we
can't
get
anyone
on
the
planning
committee
to
acknowledge
that
this
is
a
a
timeline,
sensitive
issue
or
be
that
it's
got
to
be
done.
So
that's
the
main
issue
we're
after
that's
an
issue
map
of
the
whole
park,
and
if
you
look
at
the
left
side,
the
light
green
area
is
programmable
park
area
during
the
summer.
That's
almost
entirely
full
of
soccer
players,
there's
a
large
hill,
very
large
hill.
L
It
prevents
any
use
where
we're
asking
for
is
isolated
from
the
rest
of
the
park
and
in
fact,
it's
used
as
a
camp
for
street
people
during
the
summer.
It's
so
little
years.
So
it's
not
like
we're
taking
any
assets
away
from
anyone
and
that's
just
a
map
of
the
condo
development.
In
the
area
and
as
mr.
mat
low
will
tell
you
it's
over
developed
and
overcrowded
we're
looking
at
approximately
somewhere
between
two
thousand
four
thousand
new
dogs
into
this
area,
with
no
allowance
and
planning
process
whatsoever.
L
For
that
and
we're
now
looking
at
what
I
call
catch
21.5,
it's
not
quite
catch
22,
but
it's
damn
close
we're
not
allowed
to
put
in
a
dog
off
leash
area
application
because
there's
no
funding
in
the
program.
We
are
only
allowed
dog
off
leash
application.
If
it's
in
the
capital
budget,
but
there's
no
way
to
get
it
into
the
capital
budget,
then
we
get
down
to
the
planning
is,
and
we're
told
well,
there's
a
planning
process
we'll
get
back
to
you.
We've
been
at
this
since
March
and
there's
no
formal
planning
process.
L
So
the
problem
implications
of
this
are:
we
need
a
dog
area.
There's
now
80
members
in
our
association,
we
could
have
many
more
than
that.
There's
often
50
dogs
in
the
park
at
5:00
p.m.
and
no
place
for
them
to
go,
and
the
part
planning
has
stated
it
will
not
consider
the
Metrolinx
rehab,
even
though
it'll
save
them
$200,000
in
dog,
off
leash
area
and
the
parks
plan
never
addressed
dogs
in
any
way
at
any
time.
So
those
are
our
basic
requests.
L
The
thing
I've
just
put
up
is
the
Eglinton
Green
Line
proposal
and
it's
proposing
sort
of
a
contiguous
pseudo
green
strip
from
Mount
Pleasant
over
to
the
park,
the
trouble
the
plan
can
be
modified
to
easily
accommodate
in
the
section
we
want
the
dog
off
leash
area,
but
again
we
can't
get
to
them.
So
what
we're,
after
again,
is
these
four
recommendations
that
formally
hook
us
into
the
dog
off
leash
area,
and
it's
telling
that
mr.
Matt
Lloyd
was
part
of
this
one.
L
Q
L
Q
R
Thank
you
hi.
My
name
is
Chris
Polk
I'm,
a
founding
member
of
housing
matters.
We
are
a
group
of
Torontonians
that
advocate
for
increased
housing
supply
as
to
the
affordability
crisis
that
has
been
pricing
with
these
past
few
years,
young
people
and
the
middle-class
families
out
of
the
city
housing
matters.
We
understand
that
there
are
essentially
three
ways
to
ensure
housing,
affordability
in
the
long
run.
These
are
to
increase
supply,
decrease
the
man
or
set
price
controls
of
these
three.
R
We
believe
that
the
only
sustainable
and
equitable
solution
to
rising
housing
prices
is
to
increase
supply.
We
take
very
seriously
the
common-sense
notion
that
if
we
want
more
people
to
be
able
to
live
in
Toronto,
we
need
to
build
more
housing
for
people
in
Toronto.
As
many
of
you
know,
it's
very
difficult
to
build
new
housing
in
Toronto
in
a
meaningful
way
relative
to
our
population
growth
or
new
household
formation.
This
is
why
we
have
a
very
low
rental
vacancy
rate
of
just
1.3
percent
and
maybe
lower
still.
R
It's
also
why
prices
continue
to
rise
so
rapidly
through
land
use
rules
that
constrain
supply.
We've
made
a
scarce
good
scarce.
Are
still
after
having
reviewed
the
Midtown
and
Focus
proposed
secondary
Plan
Update
being
considered
today,
it
strikes
us
as
a
group
that
many
of
the
policies
listed
will
exacerbate
the
supply
crunch
and
affordability
crisis
and
that
in
one
of
our
city's
primary
centers
that
the
province
has
specifically
targeted
for
growth.
R
The
overwhelming
majority
of
these
already
have
active
development
applications
and
this
for
what
is
supposed
to
be
a
25-year
plan.
One
say
in
particular
just
to
highlight
how
egregious
a
lot
of
this
is.
The
southwest
corner
of
Yonge
and
Rose
lawn
has
an
active
application
for
a
23
and
27
storey
tower
development,
which
means
many
of
the
tall
building
guideline
criteria.
R
There
are
two
other
examples
that
I'd
like
to
highlight
as
being
poorly
thought-out
in
terms
of
their
impact
on
affordability.
First,
the
requirement
that
larger
residential
developments
provide
section,
37
density
incentives,
acts
to
shift
the
burden
of
funding
community
benefits
from
the
broader
tax
base
to
new
home
buyers.
This
regressive
cash
grab
should
be
opposed
by
anybody
who
cares
about
fairness
or
affordability?
Second,
the
quota
is
set
for
two
and
three-bedroom
units
that
do
not
account
for
market
feedback
loops
and
which
act
to
override
industry
demand
forecasts.
R
This
sort
of
top-down
planning
can
only
ever
lead
to
malinvestment
and
the
killing
of
projects
that
would
be
rendered
on
economic
at
the
margin
taken
as
a
whole.
The
proposed
young
Eglinton
secondary
plan
update
is
a
very
alarming
document.
Indeed,
one
that
signals
further
reluctance
by
the
city
to
meaningfully
address
Toronto's
housing,
shortage
and
affordability
crisis.
If
we
do
not
seriously
reconsider
the
approach
taken
in
this
document,
we
will
continue
to
see
young
people
and
middle-class
families
moving
out
to
their
our
suburbs
and
exurbs,
while
Toronto
gradually
becomes
a
playground
for
the
rich
and
lucky.
R
Q
S
Thank
you,
mr.
chair
and
council
members
for
being
able
to
speak
here
today.
The
Southington
ratepayers
and
residents
association
has
been
in
business
for
50-plus
years
in
our
area
and
represent
a
fairly
broad
range
of
residents,
including
condo
owners,
as
well
as
low-rise
residential
folks.
The
array
area
is
entirely
inside
the
young
Eddington
secondary
plan
area,
and
we
comprise
the
largest
amount
of
land
in
sight
at
area.
S
But
we
feel
that
probably
95%
of
the
plan
is
there
and
that
we
definitely
support
support
this
plan.
We
would
like
to
point
out
that,
as
was
questioned
last
year,
there's
been
a
tremendous
amount
of
consultation
done
by
City
Planning
for
this
plan.
Very
many
many
working
group
sessions,
pop-ups
I,
think
it's
been
very
well
consulted
and
we
have
always
felt
very
welcome
in
terms
of
providing
input,
so
we're
we're
very
pleased
of
the
consultation
and
the
quality
of
basically,
the
planning
personnel
has
been
very
professional
and
very
knowledgeable.
S
We
also
very
appreciative
that
three
counselors
have
Co
basically
collaborated,
because
a
young
Eglinton
area
straddles
three
wards,
so
Josh
Matt,
Lowe,
Jay,
Robinson
and
Kristen
Carmichael
grab.
We're
very
much
appreciate
the
photos
three
to
collaborate
on
this,
and
but
I
would
like
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
what
we
like
about
this
plan,
because
it
is
very
different
from
the
young
Eglinton
secondary
plan
that
we
have
today.
S
It
was
kind
of
I
think
set
up
as
pre
mental
towers,
the
first
very,
very
tall
towers
in
our
area,
and
it's
always
been
very
scant
in
terms
of
specifics.
What
is
required
from
from
the
development
industry?
So
what
we?
What
we
liked
about
this
plan
is
that
City
Planning
did
a
very
deep
dive
and
identified,
not
just
one
young
Edmonton
area
but
23
different
character,
areas
from
because
we
have
apartment
neighborhoods.
S
We
also
liked
the
fact
that
we
have
gone
from
a
very
fairly
vague
lent,
built
forum
to
very
specific
land
use
and
built
form.
Apollo's
were
by
location.
The
city
has
identified
Heights
because
that
has
been
constantly
the
issue
with
developers
coming
in
and
in
getting
greater
and
greater
heights
in
the
area.
S
We
also
appreciate
the
recognition
that
the
current
and
the
future
development
needs
have
to
be
coupled
with
existing
a
future
plant
infrastructure
and
if
we've
really
appreciate
a
focus
on
the
heritage
in
the
area,
because
it
is
at
the
area,
does
have
a
couple
of
historic
villages
that
that
are
part
of
this
area.
So
what
what?
What
we're
seeing
is,
since
the
knowledge
that
the
young
Eggleton
plan
is
coming
forward,
since
we
are
looking
towards,
hopefully
new
OMB
reform
legislation,
applications
continue
to
pile
in
almost
every
week.
We're
having
a
new
application.
S
I
think
we're
up
to
almost
25
major
projects,
post
Minto
with
only
three
having
been
completed,
and
we
need
to
get
some
speed
on
getting
this
Yonge
and
Eglinton
deck
this
secondary
plan
completed.
We
would
actually
recommend
that
the
target
moved
up
to
the
first
quarter
of
2018
27th
2018,
just
in
case
we
do
have
delays
and
that
we
speed
things
up
as
opposed
to
slow
down,
and
we
have
additional
consultations
shortly.
Thank.
Q
You,
sir,
very
much
you're
a
little
bit
over
your
time.
Are
there
any
questions
from
outside
counselors?
Are
there
any
questions
from
committee
members?
Sir,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
presentation.
We
will
now
move
on
to
our
next
speaker
and
we're
looking
for
Kelly,
Oakes
and
Berg
good
afternoon
Kelly
thanks
for
coming
today.
Thank
you.
Q
T
You
and
I'd
like
to
just
an
advanced
say,
excuse
any
coughing,
it's
hard
to
kick
a
post
nasal
drip,
so
today,
I'll
be
speaking
more
generally
to
how
the
proposed
secondary
plan
update
relates
to
the
south-east
corner
of
Yonge.
Eglinton
I
am
here
today
on
behalf
of
Gen
cell
properties,
inc
who's,
the
owner
of
the
property
at
22:45,
Yonge
Street,
that's
just
one
property
removed
from
the
southeast
corner
of
Yonge
and
Eglinton
the
properties
occupied
by
a
bit
of
a
hodgepodge
of
a
building.
T
There
is
a
Tim
Horton's
at
grade,
a
hair
salon
on
the
second
story
and
a
one-bedroom
residential
unit
at
the
rear
of
the
building.
So
this
property
is
smack
in
the
middle
of
extensive
development
activity
at
this
corner.
My
client
has
been
actively
engaged
in
the
planning
processes
generally
related
to
this
part
of
the
Midtown
and,
more
specifically,
to
this
quadrant
of
the
young
of
Yonge
Eglinton,
including
the
approval
of
58
of
a
58
storey
tower
at
2221,
Yonge
Street
and
the
recently
approved
65
storey
tower
at
one
Eglinton
Avenue
East.
T
My
client
has
persistently
spoken
to
the
need
for
comprehensive
and
coordinated
development
for
this
corner
of
the
city
and
has
tried
to
get
the
city
involved
in
considering
the
future
of
this
corner.
My
client
has
taken
the
position
that
city
building
exercises
rooted
and
coordinated
development
are
critical
for
junctions,
like
young
Eglinton,
and
in
the
absence
of
coordinated
development,
you
can
get
leftover
and
underutilized
orphan
sites.
Yes,
that's
definitely
not
good
for
land
owners,
but
it's
not
good
for
the
city
either.
T
The
risk
of
leaving
behind
orphaned
sites
to
be
developed
on
their
own
is
very
apparent
in
this
instance,
because,
with
the
recent
approval
of
one
egg
Lincoln
Avenue,
my
clients
property
will
essentially
be
sandwich
between
a
50-story
tower
and
a
65
storey
tower.
We
have
made
these
concerns
about
this
corner
known
to
the
city
on
multiple
occasions.
The
local
councillor
is
aware
of
our
concerns
and
our
office
has
made
deputations
at
the
last
Toronto
East
York
Community
Council
meeting
regarding
one
Eglinton
Avenue.
T
My
office
submitted
a
letter
providing
specific
commentary
on
the
draft
policies
and
I'd
be
happy
to
go
through
them,
but
for
time
purposes,
I
thought
that
I
would
just
keep
my
focus
more
general
this
afternoon.
My
client
is
disappointed
because
it
has
been
trying
to
raise
the
issue
about
coordinated
development
of
this
block
with
the
city
repeatedly,
the
proposed
built
form
policies
generally
support
coordinated
development.
They
speak
to
unifying
and
comprehensive
design
to
the
consideration
of
development
potential
of
neighboring
sites
to
complete
streets
and
communities
and
to
improve
connectivity
and
access
between
neighboring
sites.
T
We
are
disappointed
that
these
words
and
terms
are
being
drafted
into
policy,
but
then
not
implemented
by
the
city
in
its
review
of
planning
applications.
We
must
ask
why
are
these
concepts
mean
ignored
in
the
context
of
the
planning
for
this
corner
of
Yonge
Eglinton?
The
recent
approval
of
one
Eglinton
Avenue
East,
is
contrary
to
the
general
intent
of
the
proposed
Secondary
Plan
Update.
Despite
these
policies,
staffs
position
towards
the
future
of
my
clients,
property
and
the
long-term
vision
of
this
corner
has
been
one
of
indifference.
T
After
reviewing
the
report,
we
are
at
a
loss
at
how
the
city
is
expecting
to
finish
the
planning
for
this
block
when
a
two-story
building
is
essentially
being
left
behind.
So
my
two
requests
for
you
today
are
to
very
reasonable
asks.
The
report
includes
a
recommendation
that
staff
undertake
consultation
with
local
property
owners,
so
in
light
of
this
direction,
we
are
specifically
requesting
today
that
city
planning
staff
meet
with
our
client
to
discuss
the
future
of
their
site
so
that
we
can
understand
staffs
vision
for
the
long
term
development
of
this
corner.
T
We
are
also
requesting
that
city
planning
staff
be
directed
to
report
back
to
planning
and
growth
regarding
opportunities
for
the
development
of
the
Jen
salt
property.
Given
the
irreconcilability
of
recent
approvals
and
the
proposed
policies,
my
client
is
looking
for
answers
and
guidance
on
how
the
directions
in
this
report
and
its
draft
policies
are
intended
to
be
implemented
at
this
corner
and
on
this
property.
Thank
you.
Thank.
Q
M
You
I
would
I
would
say
I've
general
comments
and
and
very
specific
comment
I'm
here
today
representing
the
lease
a
property
owners
association
of
which
I
am
co-president.
As
you
know,
I'm
alright,
I'm
also
involved
with
Fonterra
the
Federation
and
in
fact
we
have
submitted
comments
both
from
Fonterra
and
from
the
LPO
a
I'm
only
really
speaking
about
the
lp
way
today
because
of
a
specific
issue,
but
I
would
say
that
our
Fonterra
comments,
echo
the
comments
by
Andy
Gort
from
Sarah.
Everything
he
said
was
was
it
was,
is
reinforced
by
Montreux.
M
We
met
last
night
and
all
of
all
the
residents
in
need
Renton,
sociation,
czar,
supportive
of
of
Midtown
in
focus
and
think
that
staff
had
done
a
great
job,
paul
Farish
and
his
team
and
congratulate
staff
for
for
this.
It's
it's
a
much
improved
direction
than
we've
ever
seen
before
in
Toronto
with
planning,
and
we
believe
that
and
there's
always
there's
gonna
be
fine-tuning
needed
and
there's
gonna
be
public
consultation
starting
in
I,
guess
in
January,
so
we'll
see
well
produce
these
from
fine
tuning.
M
But
my
hit
being
here
today
is
to
note
a
couple
of
things.
One
is
that
the
up
to
now
the
LPI
hasn't
been
involved
in
this
exercise,
because
we
sit
on
the
east
side
of
Bayview
and
the
plan
always
stopped
at
the
centerline
of
Bayview
Avenue.
Well,
the
town
of
Leaside,
that
was
the
boundary
line
for
the
old
town
of
Lisa,
so
staff
recognized
that
when
you
plan
Main
streets,
when
you
plan
great
streets,
you
plan
for
both
sides.
M
So
you
can't
stop
at
the
mid
midline
of
the
street,
and
so
we
we
don't
we're
supportive
of
going
over
to
the
east
side
of
Bayview
and
and
they
have
proposed
somewhat
similar
policies
on
the
for
Bayview,
as
as
a
Mount
Pleasant
I'm,
taking
into
account
the
the
heritage
and
the
like
the
the
bachelors
things
that
occurred
a
month
ago,
approved
by
council
and
the
the
values
in
strong
values.
In
both
of
those
areas.
M
However,
we
do
have
a
concern
about
a
particular
piece
of
our
Bayview,
the
piece
from
Parkhurst
up
to
up
to
the
old
McDonald's.
It's
now
the
construction
site
for
the
light
rail
transit
crosstown
station
for
the
Leeside
Station.
The
proposals
report
recommends
that
that
parcel
that
segment
beery
designated
from
neighborhoods
to
mixed-use.
M
So.
Finally,
we
feel
that
the
inclusion
of
the
east
side
of
Bayview
in
Midtown
focus
brings
into
sharp
focus
the
need
to
deal
with
the
the
need
to
designate
this.
This
row
of
ten
quadruplex
is
at
the
Lisa
appropriate
submitted
nominations
if
you
can
believe
it
six
years
ago,
for
these
properties
and
Metrolinx
has
identified
the
one
that
it
owns
as
heritage.
M
That's
one
out
of
the
ten,
the
one
at
the
the
North
End
has
already
been
identified
by
Metrolinx.
So
why
isn't
a
city
moving
to
conduct
the
Harwich
assessment
and
make
a
decision
on
this
until
the
city
makes
a
decision
on
the
importance
of
these
ten
quadruple
X's
with
the
Midtown
InFocus
proposal
to
permit
mid
rise
development
on
this
strip
would
appear
to
be
premature
and
conflict
with
the
provincial
heritage
property
status
on
the
northern
quadruplex.
M
In
the
meantime,
the
LPO
is
fighting
a
development
proposal
that
would
demolish
and
replace
one
of
these
quads
in
the
middle,
with
two
semi-detached
dwellings.
That
means
the
number
of
units
goes
down
from
four
to
two
I'll
be
finished
and
just
to
say
the
complete
opposite
of
intensification
of
the
whole
policy
of
mid
rise
and
of
the
growth
plan,
plus
the
the
loss
of
reasonably
priced
rental
accommodation.
So,
unfortunately,
the
LPO
is
fighting
this
battle
alone.
The
city
has
withdrawn
from
the
t
lab
case.
Thank.
Q
You
thank
you
very
much
for
your
deputation
any
questions
from
outside
councilors
any
from
committee
members.
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
deputation.
You
just
go
back
quickly
to
see
if
Erica
pilota
is
in
the
room
and
she's.
Not
so
any
speakers
to
the
item
outside
councilors
councillor,
Matt
Lowe,
councillor,
Robinson,.
K
You
for
your
work
on
this
and
keeping
us
abreast
of
how
this
is
unfolding.
You
know
councillor
Matt,
Lowe
and
I
and
Carmichael
Greb
have
all
struggled
with
the
level
of
intensification,
unprecedented
levels
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton.
How
will
this,
which
is
shaping
up
to
be
a
final
report
in
the
spring?
How
will
this
address
some
of
the
some
of
the
major
challenges
were
struggling
with
that
the
in
the
Eglinton
area.
O
Was
that
what
is
presented
as
a
proposed
plan
moving
towards
the
final
plan
in
the
spring
is
intentionally
very
comprehensive,
so
our
intent
for
addressing
some
of
the
infrastructure
gaps
we've
identified
through
our
assessments
is
that
we
can
achieve
that.
Both
their
policy,
as
well
as
strategies
dedicated
to
parts
dedicated
transportation
dedicated
to
water,
as
well
as
to
community
services
and
facilities.
K
You
thank
you
mr.
chair,
so
I
want
to
begin
by
just
mentioning
that
councillor
by
Lao
is
to
encourage
a
motion
that
was
drafted
by
both
myself
and
councillor,
Robinson,
which
is
really
and
I,
and
admittedly
worked
on
with
planning
staff
to
complement
the
recommendations
that
you
see
in
the
report
on
behalf
of
the
community
and
the
reason
we
are
moving.
This
motion
is
because
we'd
like
to
see,
along
with
you
know,
especially
in
light
of
the
reforms
of
the
OMB
through
bill
139
that
are
going
through
the
legislature.
K
Now,
both
councillor,
Robinson
and
I,
are
very
interested
to
know
what
tools
are
either
in
the
toolbox
or
perhaps
being
discussed
to
be
added
to
the
toolbox.
That
would
further
ensure
that
necessary
infrastructure
and
social
services
will
always
be
the
focus
of
our
planning
and,
in
fact,
be
even
more
insured,
as
growth
continues
in
the
area.
K
I
want
to
also
thank
and
Marie
and
karien
and
Cassidy,
and
our
wonderful,
acting
our
acting
chief,
planner
and
and
and
many
others
who
have
contributed
to
this
report,
thus
far
in
all
relevant
divisions
and
and
and
departments,
and
for
the
first
time
ever
kind
of
crossing
the
border
of
planning
areas
where
North
York
and
in
Toronto
nice
your
car
working
comprehensively
at
the
same
table
as
many
of
us
have
asked
for
a
long
time.
But
the
reason
just
in
case
he
thought
his
name
was
omitted.
K
When
I
say
deeply
consultative
I
mean
if
you
could
find
any
group
of
people
that
could
congregate,
and
you
know
in
a
form
of
more
than
two
people,
they
were
invited
to
partake
in
this
process
and
I
really
respect
that.
That
was
the
way
it
went.
The
reason
that
we're
doing
this
is
that
you
know,
since
back
in
the
mid-2000s,
when
the
places
to
grow
act
was
approved.
You
know
there's
a
lot
of
wisdom
there,
along
with
the
growth
plan
to
mitigate
urban
sprawl
and
make
sure
that
we
had
reasonable
intensification
in
growth
centers.
K
The
failure,
though,
was
that
that
legislation
never
insured,
along
with
the
plan
that
infrastructure,
the
transit
and
and
the
utilities,
and
that
you
know
the
hard
stuff
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
you
have
a
functional
community
as
growth
continues.
Were
there
it
written
somewhere
that
it
actually
had
to
happen.
Same
thing
goes
for
social
services,
I
mean
you
look
at
a
dearth
of
affordable
child
care.
K
The
elementary
schools
are
so
packed
now
that
the
school
board
opted
to
actually
take
all
the
sixth
grade
classes,
out
of
all
the
elementary
schools
and
put
them
into
Hodgson,
because
they've
run
out
of
space
and
now
they're
even
building
additions
and
put
into
portables
and
I
could
go
on
about
all
the
social
services,
including
recreation
that
we
have
a
dearth
of.
So
this
is
what
we
are
trying
to
do
is
move
away
from
the
tire
debate
of.
Are
you
pro
development
or
anti
development?
That's
just
a
it's!
It's
a
nonsensical!
The
city
will
grow.
K
What
we
want
to
do
is
put
the
narrative
for
how
do
you
build
community?
How
do
you
ensure
people
have
access
to
child
care?
How
do
you
make
sure
that
people
have
access
to
recreation?
Your
kid
can
go
to
the
local
school
that
they
can
get
on
the
subway
in
the
morning
or
LRT
or
bus,
and
not
have
to
wait
one
after
another
after
another
as
they
go
by.
How
do
you
do
that?
K
A
K
You
very
much
mr.
chair,
I,
appreciate
it,
and
I
will
be
brief,
because
councillor
Matt
Lowe
has
done
an
excellent
job.
Summarizing
the
story
story
line,
but
I
will
credit
counselors
since
way
back
when,
when
the
three
of
us
worked
together
to
actually
get
this
up
and
running,
simply
because
there
isn't
a
Midtown
Council
and
we've
got
three
councillors
really
trying
to
weave
together
a
community,
and
so
this
process
has
been
an
excellent
one.
K
The
number
one
thing
we
hear
about
is
the
infrastructure
gaps
and
again
councillor
mantle
has
done
a
good
job
in
summarizing
those,
so
I
won't
go
over
them
again,
but
there
isn't
a
meeting
or
a
day.
That
goes
by
that
we
don't
get
an
email
about
these
issues
and
and
people
often
email
and
say
you
know:
I
just
walked
home
along
red
path
and
I'm
covered
in
dust.
K
So
that's
the
ongoing
challenges
of
the
day-to-day
life
at
Yonge
and
Eglinton
right
now,
but
the
issue
is,
people
are
focused
on
the
future
and
the
immediate
future
and
those
infrastructure
gaps,
and
that
is
the
number
one
concern
in
this
in
this
area
of
our
city.
So
without
a
doubt
so
again,
thank
you
to
all
those
involved:
Thank
You
councillor,
Matt
Lowe
and
councillor
Carmichael,
Greb
and
I.
Look
forward
to
this
coming
to
fruition
and
seeing
a
final
report.
A
T
A
O
A
Okay,
are
there
any
committee
speakers
on
this
item?
It's
everybody
worn
out.
So
then
we
had
a
few
go
through
it
on
the
consent.
So
then
I
will
call
the
vote
on
this
item.
The
amendment
by
Councillor
by
lo,
all
in
favor
any
opposed
that
is
carry
the
item
as
amended
all
those
in
favor.
Any
opposed
carry.
Thank
you
to
our
colleagues
for
coming.
We
have
now
townhouse
and
low-rise
guidelines
and
before
we
begin
that
I
was
asked.
If
I
could
reopen
one
item
that
we
dealt
with
earlier.
A
E
A
This
is
recommendation
two
from
the
original
report
staff
of
a
house
that
we
also
adopt
this,
so
I
will
move
that
all
those
in
favor
of
the
amendment
opposed
carry
the
item
as
amended
amended
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried.
That
is
done.
We
have
one
item,
left
town
house
and
low-rise
apartment
guidelines.
We
have
no
speakers.
We
do
have
questions
from
members
of
the
committee.
C
To
start
with,
maybe
I
can
get
a
little
bit
of
a
visual
aid
so
when,
when
these
guidelines
were
being
developed,
we
looked
at
some
townhouse
townhouses
that
have
been
constructed
that
didn't
work
so
well,
some
that
worked
better
and
there
were
visuals
in
the
reports.
You
have
sort
of
a
worst-case,
best-case
kind
of
visual.
You
can
put
up
for
us.
What
we're
trying
to
achieve
here.
A
E
O
K
Sorry
threw
your
chair:
these
are
some
examples
of
buildings
that
have
been
built
around
the
area
and
on
the
left.
You
have
some
examples
that,
through
our
observations
and
site
visits
to
Deford
districts,
we
see
some
examples
where
you
have.
Buildings
are
really
close
to
the
property
line,
who
buildings
that
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
landscaping
around
the
entrance
areas
and
then
on
the
right.
K
You
have
examples
where
you
have
better
designs,
where
there
are
attention
to
detail
and
landscaping,
and
this
is
a
type
of
thing
that
we
want
to
see
in
our
guidelines
which,
in
our
guidelines,
we
try
to
create
areas
where
you
can
actually
improve
the
landscaping
and
the
design
of
these
entrances,
so
that
you,
you
can
actually
create
a
better
public
realm
and
make
sure
that
that
these
buildings
are
not
creating
on
on
an
attractive
areas
and
name
and
contact
says
very
sensitive
in
some
cases.
Ok,.
C
Mr.
chair,
you
can
restart
my
time
any
time
you
want.
Additionally,
as
I
understand
it.
These
guidelines
take
some
steps
to
move
things
like
garbage,
storage
and
air-conditioning
units
out
there
sometimes
put
in
front
of
townhouse
units
to
better
locations
for
the
public
room.
Is
that
correct
as
well?
Siri
cherán,
that's
correct!
Ok!
So
there's
some
big
public
realm
games
here
too
mr.
Lyne
turn
so
I
received
a
presentation
based
on
this
I
want
to
say
about
eight
months
ago:
I
my
date
might
be
wrong.
C
F
F
C
C
F
F
O
F
C
O
A
A
O
We
were
we
discussed
and
it
was
a
good
discussion.
We
discussed
the
fact
that
the
report
did
recommend
a
monitoring
period
so
in
staff's
mind.
That's
our
version
of
consultation.
I
certainly
acknowledge
the
industry's
interest
in
the
matter.
As
normally
do
we
want
to
have
a
good
relationship
with
the
builders
and
developers
in
the
city
and
indicated
that
if
they
desired
more
time,
they
could
put
that
to
you
in
a
letter
and
indicate,
as
they
ultimately
did
in
the
letter
that
I
read
this
morning
indicate
more
specifically
what
their
issues
are.
O
Those
issues
are
not
substantially
different
than
what
they
raised
during
the
consultation
or
in
the
meeting
with
you.
I
think.
The
the
issue
of
flexibility
is
a
theme
we
said
in
the
meeting.
You
know
me.
Ultimately,
we
may
agree
to
disagree
and
ultimately,
these
are
guidelines
and
that
they'll
be
applied
in
a
case-by-case
basis.
O
O
Ultimately,
which
may
very
well
upon
seeing
their
letter
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
be,
as
their
letter
indicates,
abandoned
certain
requirements.
I,
don't
think,
that's
something
that
staff
we're
going
to
certainly
give
you
advice
to.
Do
we
certainly
listen
and
talk
to
them
as
we
normally
do,
and
there
could
be
some
further
tweaking
through
the
course
of
that.
So.
A
If
we
do
defer
it,
we
couldn't
do
that
to
the
January
meeting,
because
that
would
mean
we
would
have
to
resolve
all
the
issues
in
about
two
weeks
to
get
any
amendments
forward
to
this
committee.
So
we
had
talked
about
the
February
meeting
as
being
the
one
that
we
may
have,
but
that
was
raised
in
the
meeting
and
if
we
do
defer
there
and
I
know
you
really
would
like
to
have
it
go
forward
today.
O
L
O
As
with
any
guidelines,
they
help
us
implement
the
policy
intent
of
the
Official
Plan
and
the
direction
in
the
report
is
that
staff
used
these
guidelines
in
all
applications
as
a
review
tool
to
help
us
evaluate
the
mayor
of
the
development
requests
that
are
in
front
of
us.
So
as
a
practical
matter,
we
can.
We
can
move
forward
with
new
guidelines
that
were
ultimately
or
originally
adopted,
I
think
by
Council
in
2003.
O
L
O
O
L
O
C
This
actually
was
originally
in
some
of
the
consultation
that
staff
had,
if
you
think,
of
some
of
those
really
awful
townhouse
developments,
for
example,
the
ones
in
the
Massey
lands
along
Joe
Shuster
way,
or
something
like
that,
where
you
have
walk
into
a
walk
up
set
of
stairs
and
there
are
six
doors
there
and
each
door
leads
to
a
different
units.
I'm
going
up
so
I'm
going
down,
there's
a
well
that
you
go
down
into
and
there's
another
three
units.
C
It's
terrible
urban
forms,
some
of
the
worst
housing
developments,
I
have
seen
anywhere
in
the
city
or
on
that
form.
Nevertheless,
this
is
a
vote
on
how
you
want
on
this
I'm,
putting
it
up,
because
I
I
think
it
would
creates
better
form,
but
also
want
members
to
know.
This
is
something
that
was
a
rid
the
original
consultation
that
staff
conceded
because
bill
didn't
want
it
in.
C
So
the
reason
that
part
of
the
reason
that
we
don't
have
to
move
an
amendment
to
get
this
protection
of
the
public
realm
is
because
builders
already
rested
concessions
out
of
the
city.
On
this.
Now
you
heard
from
my
questions
of
staff
that
I
and
other
members
of
the
planning
and
growth
committee
were
shown.
Essentially
this
document
eight
months
ago,
and
it
has
been
sitting
out,
I
have
been
monthly,
sending
it
out
to
the
chief
planner
and
the
clerk
asking
when
we
will
get
to
these,
because
I
am
sick
and
tired
of
terrible
urban
form.
C
These
guidelines
help
us
make
sure
that
doesn't
happen
anymore
and
for
a
practical
matter
is
someone
who
probably
goes
to
to
community
meetings
a
week
about
mid-rise
applications.
I
will
tell
you
that
every
single
time
the
developer
proposes
the
first
thing
they
do
in
their
presentation
is
show
how
well
they
conform
to
the
mid-rise
guidelines,
because
everyone
in
Toronto
knows
about
the
mid-rise
guidelines
and
the
first
question
the
developer
is
going
to
get
from.
The
community
is
who
you
meet
the
mid-rise
guidelines
so
to
insert
councillor
Phil
Ian's
question
from
a
practical
point
of
view.
C
Once
Council
has
endorsed
this
policy,
it
gives
the
public
a
tool,
a
question.
They
can
ask
City
Planning
staff
and
ask
applicants
to
help
those
people
who
are
not
professional
planners
to
understand
is
this
good
quality.
This
application
I
know
that
build
is
not
satisfied.
I
know
that
they
weren't
satisfied
thirteen
months
ago.
I
know
that
thirteen
months
from
now
they
won't
be
satisfied.
They
will
never
be
satisfied
with
the
document,
as
it
is.
The
only
thing
we
gain
by
delay
in
this
instance
is
delay.
There
is
no
practical
benefit
to
the
residents
of
Toronto.
C
There's
no
practical
benefit
to
the
urban
form
of
the
city
that
we're
trying
to
build
in
this
crazy
boom
were
in
the
middle
of
there's.
No
practical
benefit
to
anybody
except
build
who
benefit
by
having
these
guidelines
take
forever
to
appear.
They've
managed
to
stop
us
for
thirteen
months
without
giving
conceding
an
inch,
giving
them
three
more
or
one
more
or
six
more
is
of
no
benefit
to
anybody,
but
them
so
I
hope
you
support
this.
A
I
actually
asked
one
of
the
members
that
represents
the
Toronto
chapter
about
some
other
items
as
well,
and
this
one
came
up
because
there's
been
concerns
and
in
due
respect
and
I
appreciate
what
Daniel
does
for
build.
She
is
a
representative
of
multiple
different
facets
of
it
and
it's
hard
to
actually
get
a
decision
of
one
person
representing
so
many,
but
industry
members
were
there
and
they
had
some
specific
concerns.
A
So
we
could
do
that
and
I
am
understanding
of
wanting
to
get
it
on
a
staff
perspective.
I
also
asked
them
to
help
us
with
some
other
issues.
If
they
were
interested
and
one
is
our
citywide
zoning
bylaw,
which
our
staff
are
talking
about
approved
in
2013
and
still
when
an
application
comes
forward,
there's
could
be
11
or
12
variances
to
under
the
new
bylaw
and
the
rest
under
the
old,
bylaw
and
I
didn't
ask
to
resolve
the
issue.
A
For
that
reason,
I
don't
think
it
will
impact
us
that
much
because,
although
they
aren't
endorsed
by
council,
the
new
standards
are
the
one
that
people
are
using
counts.
Additional
brought
up
and
discussed
some
of
the
designs
and
that
are
in
the
guidelines
and
the
pictures
of
them
actually
don't
meet
the
new
guidelines.
L
Given
that
staff
I'm
just
I'm
not
totally
opposed
to
a
deferral,
if
it
will
achieve
some
good,
what
I'm
I
heard
from
the
chief
planner
that
the
issues
they've
raised
they're
all
issues-
we've
said
no
to
previously
so
are
we?
Are
we
achieving
anything
through
this
diplomacy,
or
are
we
just
saying
what
what
do
you
expect
to
come
of
this
snow.
A
It
I
thought
to
give
them
the
extra
month
or
so
to
see
how
they
could
work
it
out,
because
all
the
city
isn't
the
same
and
see
if
those
folks
are
there.
That's
most
important
to
me.
I
appreciate
that
be
ILD
and
I
have
to
keep
spelling
it
until
the
new
year
when
bu
ILD
won't
exist
anymore,
but
that
build
is
there
on
behalf
of
theirs
and
I'm.
A
In
that
spirit
of
cooperation,
I,
don't
think
it'll
impact
a
lot
and
from
the
discussions
that
were
there
I
think
that
either
we
can
resolve
some
of
the
issues
or
we
can
get
clarification
to
the
way
that
they
will
be
monitored
and
reviewed
if
they
become
problems
for
changes
to
the
guidelines
in
a
reasonable
period
of
time,
so
they're
looking
at
even
if
you
adopt
them.
How
are
you
monitoring
it?
How
are
you
training
your
folks?
What's
the
training
that's
in
place,
and
if
there
are
problems,
how
can
we
get
them
fixed
and
I?
L
A
We
have
the
deferral
motion
and
all
those
in
favor
opposed
that
carries
and
I
do
appreciate
everybody's
input
on
it
and
all
the
people
that
have
helped
on.
We
have
no
other
items.
Members.
Thank
you
very
much
for
spending
your
day
here
and
putting
in
and
dealing
with
it
all
here.
I'll
appreciate
and
councillor
Campbell
I
know
left
because
he
had
a
meeting
he
had
to
get
to.
Otherwise
he
would
have
stayed
at
least
that's
what
he
told
me.