►
Description
Toronto and East York Community Council, meeting 13, February 5, 2020
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=17151
Meeting Navigation:
0:12:31 - Call to order
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
You
very
much
councillor
Bradford,
any
others
seeing
none
can
I,
have
a
motion
to
confirm
the
minutes
of
January
8
2020
councillor
Matt
Lowe,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
members
before
we
do
our
agenda
rundown.
You
might
recall
that
at
the
last
meeting
we
passed
a
motion
to
consider
the
city's
corporate
security
plan,
given
that
council
considered
it
at
its
most
recent
meeting
in
consultation
with
the
clerk
with
the
clerk.
What
I've
suggesting
is
that
we
have
a
presentation.
A
C
These
measures
will
affect
members
of
the
public
attending
our
deputing
in
at
least
two
ways
facility
how
they
enter
the
facility
and
patrons
screening.
Public
access
to
the
building
will
continue
through
the
main
doors,
cafe,
doors
and
paths.
Entrance
public
access
will
no
longer
continue
to
the
back
Hagerman
doors
or
the
Northwest
doors,
which
are
also
the
least
used
doors
in
the
building.
C
The
walk
through
metal
detectors
currently
used
to
access.
The
council
chamber
will
be
relocated
to
the
main
floor,
extending
the
safety
enhancement
from
the
chamber
only
to
the
majority
of
the
building.
Once
a
member,
the
public
is
screened.
On
the
main
floor,
no
further
screening
is
required
to
access
the
committee
rooms
or
the
chamber.
C
The
walk
through
metal
detectors
will
be
located
on
the
main
floor
on
the
west
side
of
the
Toronto.
At
your
service
information
desk
during
business
hours
upon
entry
to
the
main
floor,
a
visitor
will
be
greeted
by
a
Toronto
at
your
service
representative
and
directed
to
the
screening
area.
Signage
will
also
be
in
place
providing
directions.
These
changes
will
commence
on
Tuesday
February
18th,
temporary
stanchions
will
be
used
to
delineate
the
screening
area
until
such
time
as
a
semi-permanent
glass
physical
measure
is
installed.
C
Visitor
screening
is
not
expected
to
dramatically
increase
the
time
it
takes
a
visitor
to
enter
the
building.
We
do,
however,
anticipate
that
the
process
will
be
slower
at
the
initial
start,
especially
as
visitors
become
aware
of
the
new
procedures.
Best
practices,
however,
indicate
that
the
screening
process
should
average
less
than
15
seconds
per
person.
C
C
C
Formal
communications
plan
is
being
followed
to
communicate
to
the
many
visitors
staff
and
tenants
regarding
the
security
enhancements
using
various
communication
vehicles,
including
the
city's
website.
Social
media
pages
news
releases,
3-1-1
and
on-site
signage,
advance
planning
and
preparation
for
a
large
amount
of
visitors
to
the
building
is
also
critical
to
ensure
there
is
little
delay
to
the
screening
process,
corporate
security
staff,
complete
a
weekly
review
of
planned
meetings
and
internal
events
for
awareness
of
peak
periods
of
visitor
access.
C
Should
the
committee
chair
members
of
the
committee
or
the
committee
administrator
also
be
aware
of
any
expected
large
numbers
of
attendees.
Regarding
a
particular
item,
we
would
appreciate
if
notification
could
occur
to
corporate
security
or
the
acting
sergeant-at-arms
in
advance,
so
they
can
make
the
appropriate
staffing
adjustments
to
compensate
for
the
expected
peak
periods.
C
A
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
questions
of
the
presenters?
No
seeing
none.
Thank
you
so
much
for
taking
time
out
of
your
day
to
come.
Share
that
with
us.
Are
there
any
comments
that
members
want
to
make?
Perhaps
I'll
say
a
word,
as
many
of
you
know,
I
I
consider
it
something
of
a
Civic
loss
to
the
City
of
Toronto
that
we
are
compelled
to
put
these
measures
in
place.
This
isn't
the
fault
of
city
staff.
Obviously,
Council
asked
for
these
measures
to
be
introduced,
but
it's
a
loss.
A
A
D
Thank
you
very
much
and
I
just
wanted
to
lend
some
support
to
councilor
crusty
and
the
efforts
that
he
is
leading
in
his
local
community
to
to
mark
this
historical
designation.
As
a
member
of
the
Chinese
Canadian
community,
we
are
very
much
aware
that
that
many
of
us
and
of
our
forefathers
and
foremothers
were
part
of
nation-building
in
Canada.
Without
the
creation
and
linking
of
the
the
railroad
system
from
coast-to-coast,
a
confederation
would
have
never
happened.
So
this
is
a
very
important
commemoration.
D
A
E
A
E
A
And
members,
perhaps
we
can
take
this
on
as
our
new
cause
and
eventually
where
the
staff
down,
so
they
write
them
in
as
part
of
their
no
they're
saying
no,
the
lawyers
don't
like
that.
Well,
we'll
just
have
to
keep
them
posing
it
on
them.
Won't
we,
okay,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
item
te.
Thirteen
point,
two
one:
six,
six
one:
six:
six:
three
and
six:
six
five
here
on
Street
zoning
amendment
and
rental
housing,
demolition
applications,
preliminary
report,
councillor
Laettner,
yes,.
E
Thank
you
very
much,
though,
there's
a
motion
on
this
item.
Two.
That's
the
same
as
the
last
motion
should
note.
This
will
be
an
incredibly
interesting
one
to
come
back
as
it's
a
sort
of
missing
middle
infill
project
on
a
predominantly
residential
single-family
home
street,
with
what
could
be
a
hairatan
component,
but
the
community's
been
working
with
the
developer
for
some
time.
I
think
there's
been
three
or
four
meetings
already
so
I'll
move
the
motion
a
minute.
Okay,.
A
We
all
look
forward
to
that.
All
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
item
te
13.2,
260
mill
street
zoning
amendment
by
law.
The
zoning
bylaw
amendment
application
preliminary
report,
I'm
going
to
hold
that
for
speakers.
Item
te,
13.2,
3,
Danforth,
Avenue
planning,
study
city,
initiated
plan,
amendment
to
luminary
report,
Broadview
Avenue
to
Coxwell
Avenue.
We
have
speakers
on
that
as
well.
Item
te.
Thirteen
point:
two:
four:
six
Dawes
Road
zoning
amendment
application
plenary
report:
councillor
Bradford
thanks.
B
A
You
go
very
good.
All
those
in
favor
opposed
carry
item
te.
Thirteen
point:
two:
five
noise
exemption
permit
refusal
appealed
18,
Spadina
Avenue.
We
have
a
decisions
on
that
item,
te
thirteen
point:
two:
six
designation
of
fire
routes,
an
amendment
to
chapter
eight,
eight,
zero
fire
routes
for
125,
Blue,
Jay
way,
councillor
cressie.
B
A
A
B
D
A
Te
thirteen
point:
two:
eight
construction,
staging
area,
Sudbury
Street,
one
one;
eight
one:
Queen
Street
councillor,
Bradford,
just
move
the
staff
recommendations.
Please
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carry
item
te;
thirteen
point:
two:
nine
construction,
staging
area,
time
extension,
armory
street
eleven
and
thirty,
three
Center
Avenue
and
eighty
Chestnut
Street
councillor
cressie
to.
A
F
I
have
an
amendment
just
to
make
sure
that
it
is
washed
daily
on
behalf
of
the
residents.
I
move
the
recommendation
with
a
with
a
brief
comment:
isn't
it
remarkable
that
when
they
actually
want
to
figure
out
how
to
keep
both
the
road
lane
and
the
sidewalk
open
that
they
can
figure
it
out,
it
happens
if
people
decide
to
become
creative?
This
is
an
example
of
that
and
let
there
be
many
more
examples
of
this
to
come.
Thank.
A
A
A
A
D
I'd
like
to
move
the
recommendations
in
the
staff
report
and
note
that
our
office
will
be
moving
similar
motions
like
this
and
similar
report.
Recommendations
like
this
moving
forward,
there's
been
over
15
years,
I.
Think
of
new
development
in
the
cork
town
distillery
area,
where
we
were
not
necessarily
deliberately
excluding
new
developments
from
taking
advantage
of
sweet
on
Street
permit
parking.
We
have
a
lot
of
difficult
conditions
there
so
moving
forward.
Everyone
can
expect
more
of
this
from
us.
A
A
A
A
Those
in
favor
opposed
carried
item
te.
Thirteen
point:
four
for
traffic
control
signals;
Dundas
Street
West
at
Quebec,
Avenue
I'll
move
the
staff
recommendations,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
item
te,
thirteen
point
four
or
five
traffic
control
signals,
College,
Street
and
Palmerston
Avenue
and
Palmerston
Boulevard
councillor
Leighton.
Yes,.
E
A
D
Thank
you
very
much.
I
would
like
to
move
the
alternative
recommendations
and
I
would
add
that
without
the
polling
is
that
what
we
have
on
the
screen?
Thank
you
very
much
and
I
want
to
thank
the
local
community
for
their
patience,
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
implement
and
further
strengthen
vision,
zero
objectives
in
the
downtown
core,
okay,.
A
D
F
F
A
A
B
A
A
E
Could
I
just
could
I
just
point
out?
One
thing:
you
absolutely
go
to
page
two
of
my
motion.
It
gives
the
parking
a
permit
poll
results
and
this
just
speaks
to
the
fact
that
polls
aren't
the
most
effective
way
to
do
this.
If
you
look
at
the
distribution
we
sent
out
41
a
ballot
own.
Ten
were
two
in
valid
addresses.
However,
that
came
about
so
the
number
of
bouts
received
by
voters
was
31.
We
only
needed
8
to
come
back,
but
only
six
did
four
were
in
favor,
but
then
I
don't
understand
the
results
cuz.
E
If
six
came
back,
why
were
only
four
counted
in
favor
and
none
against
and
there
in
less
two
were
spoiled,
which
is
a
a
horribly
high
level
of
spoilage.
Given
we'd
only
got
six
back,
and
so
it
didn't
meet
any
of
the
requirements.
All
of
them
came
back
in
favor,
so
the
polling
is
not
always
the
most
effective
means
of
doing
this.
We
have
received
a
petition
signed
by
most
of
the
neighbors,
far
greater
than
four
and
we're
happy
to
proceed.
E
A
Take
your
thoughts
on
pulling
under
advisement
counselor
yeah.
Don't
rely
I'm
sure,
there's
a
lesson
there
for
all
of
us.
Okay,
so
on
the
recommendation
in
councillor
Layton's
letter,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
item
te
thirteen
point:
five,
six
implementation
of
permit
parking
on
little
Norway
Crescent
between
Queens
key
and
Stadium
Road.
A
A
Those
in
favor
opposed
carried
item
te.
Thirteen
point:
five:
eight
request
to
review
forty
nine
Heath
Street
West
for
inclusion
on
the
city's
Heritage
Register.
There's
a
recommendation
from
councillor
Matt,
Lowe
and
I
would
like
to
move
that
I'm
shocked.
All
those
in
favor
opposed
carry
item
te.
Thirteen
point:
five:
nine
new
business
request,
speed,
limit
reduction
on
Roundtree,
Avenue
chambers,
Avenue
rose,
thorn
Avenue
and
turn
burry
Avenue
230
kilometres.
There
are
four
recommendations
in
the
letter
from
councillor
bylaw
councillor
Bradford
like.
A
Those
in
favor
opposed
carry
okay,
so
that
gets
us
through
everything
I
have
in
the
rundown,
so
we
will
return
to
our
timed
items,
beginning
with
te
13.1
renaming
of
a
portion
of
Blue
Jay
way
between
Spadina
Avenue
and
Navy
Wharf
port
I
have
listed
mark
Liz,
Owen
well,
come
on
up
and
tell
me
how
to
get
it
right.
Mark
just
have
a
seat.
A
G
You
so
much
councillor
perks
for
acknowledging
me
Thank
You,
councillor,
Matt,
low
councilor
and
Layton
vice
councillor
in
Toronto,
councillor
Wellington,
councillor
Bradford
I'm
voting,
no
I
came
here
to
tell
the
truth.
I
came
here
to
tell
the
truth
is
I
like
what
I
know
anyways
councillor
Bradford
councillor
cressie.
Thank
you
very
much
for
being
here
today.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
me,
I'm,
sorry
to
be
here.
G
For
this
reason,
but
as
I
read,
the
report
for
action
I
find
that
there
is
a
major
error
in
this
report
and
that
it
does
not
conform
with
city
policy.
On
page
two
of
the
report,
it
says
these
naming
proposals
comply
with
the
City
of
Toronto
Street
naming
policy
which
can
be
found
at
and
I
I
took
the
time
to
read
the
name
policy
and
I
find
that
a
section.
G
Three
point
eight
point:
one
says
that
street
names,
including
ceremonial
names,
shall
not
result
in
or
be
perceived
to,
confer
any
competitive
advantage
benefit
or
preferential
treatment
or
advertisement
to
the
named
party
or
a
product
service
or
a
particular
business.
City
Place
is
a
private
development.
It's
not
a
social
housing
project
that
I
believe
they're,
putting
up
condos
on
the
proposed
City
Place
way
right
now,
they're
trying
to
sell
them
in
competition
with
other
developers.
G
I
think
there's
no
doubt
that
this
would
be
perceived
to
confer
a
competitive
advantage
or
preferential
treatment
to
the
name,
party,
product
service
or
particular
business.
So
I
think
that's
a
big
mistake.
I
also
think
there's
a
second
major
error,
maybe
even
bigger
than
the
first
one,
which
is
section
3.7
of
the
street.
Naming
policy
says
that
all
City
costs
involved
in
renaming
a
street
shall
be
the
responsible,
the
applicant.
Nevertheless,
in
the
report
for
action,
financial
impact,
it
says
the
cost
to
install
street
name.
G
Signage
is
approximately
five
hundred
dollars
and
is
included
within
the
Transportation
Services
Division
operating
budget.
This
is
a
huge
problem.
I
mean
we
shouldn't
be
giving
public
money
when
the
applicant
should
be
paying
so
so
I
think
that
this
report
again
it's
got
major
flaws.
They've
gotten
page
two.
G
It
says
the
naming
proposals
comply
with
the
City
of
Toronto
street
name
policy
and,
at
the
very
least,
I
feel
that
the
director
of
engineering
supports
services
who
signed
this
document
should
give
his
opinion
as
to
why
he
believes
it
does
comply
with
the
street-name
policy
before
you
approve
it
before
you
give
a
handout
of
a
public
asset
to
you
know
what
could
be
perceived
to
be
preferential
treatment
for
a
particular
business.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
B
A
H
A
A
A
B
H
A
A
H
A
H
A
H
I
Exactly
five
minutes,
so
I
so
good
morning,
counselor
perks,
members
of
the
committee.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
respond
to
the
final
report
of
the
zoning
amendment
441
Wabash
Avenue
I'm,
a
resident
of
the
neighborhood
as
well
as
volunteer
chair
of
the
Friends
of
Charles
G
Williams
Park.
It's
the
park
which
abuts
the
city's
west
property
line.
It's
a
well
used
well-loved
park,
drainage
and
accessibility
issues.
Well-Worn
equipment
have
prompted
the
city
to
undertake
a
renovation
scheduled
for
August
of
this
year.
I
Our
volunteer
resident
group
was
formed
in
2017
were
dedicated
to
advocating
for
the
community
in
the
lead
up
to
the
plan.
Rebirth
renovation,
we've
worked
to
collect
community
input
through
surveys,
design,
charrette,
newsletters,
public
events,
neighborhood
outreach,
Park,
cleanups,
hosted
community
events
such
as
basketball
skills,
workshops
for
youth,
youth
and
we've
been
collaborating
with
the
city
PFR
department.
The
refurbishment
will
include
expanding
the
playground
area
to
mitigate
the
mitigate.
I
The
current
overcrowding
resurfacing,
the
basketball
court,
the
addition
of
a
bocce
court
and
changing
the
wading
pool
to
a
splash
pad
to
accommodate
more
all
ages
play.
Our
summary
of
concerns
has
been
noted
in
the
final
report.
Being
discussed
today
were
encouraged
to
know
that
our
letter-writing
and
petition
earmarking,
several
negative
impacts
that
should
be
discussed,
have
been
acknowledged.
I'm
review
them
here
and
followed
by
a
couple
questions.
I
So
the
basketball
court
in
all
play
activities
the
untenable
distance
between
the
basketball
court
and
the
front
yards
and
entrances
of
the
new
townhomes
creates
issues
with
free
play,
free
and
fun
play
adds
a
constant
concern
over
the
ball
going
over
to
the
wards,
the
homes,
the
ever-present
feeling
that
you
are
invading
the
public
spaces
of
these
four-story
towers.
The
basketball
courts
are
well
used
by
all
ages
and
the
neighborhood
values
them
greatly.
Players
have
expressed
particular
concern
over
the
risk
of
straight
balls,
damaging
the
proposed
property.
I
Playful.
Normal
use
of
a
basketball
court
is
inherently
noisy.
The
interests
of
those
using
this
space
are
very
much
in
conflict
with
those
who'll
be
living
16
feet
away
from
the
court.
There's
precedent
for
this
of
conflict,
as
counselor
by
Lao,
can
attest
at
McGregor
Park,
for
example,
the
downtown
Toronto
Softball
Association
approached
the
city
with
their
concerns.
Two
years
before
the
conflict
arose,
the
u.s.
I
Trust
for
Public
Land
considers
basketball
hoops
one
of
the
six
amenities
important
to
their
parks
core
index,
because
they
serve
all
levels
of
activity,
desires
and
ages
of
users
a
wall.
The
removal
of
the
existing
12-foot
wall
will
no
doubt
affect
the
user
experience
of
the
park
and
not
just
in
the
area
of
the
basketball
court.
I
The
sight
lines
to
the
park
are
clear:
they're
not
hampered
in
any
way
the
wall
is
not
blocking
public
access.
It's
protecting
the
nature
of
the
play
activities
in
the
park.
The
main
park,
amenities
which
book
in
the
south
and
north
ends
of
the
park,
encourage
activities
by
all
ages
and
at
various
hours
of
the
day
and
evening.
I
As
for
the
importance
of
parks
on
page
13
of
the
final
report
being
discussed
today,
the
city
acknowledges
that
our
urban
parks
perform
a
critical
function
and
that
sustaining
public
park
activities
is
essential,
having
illustrated
the
defining
circumstances
around
the
importance
of
this
buffer
between
the
public
park
and
the
private
property.
My
questions
are
thus:
is
the
installation
of
a
36
inch,
high
91,
centimeter
vertical
wrought
iron
fence
proposed
by
the
city,
the
best
choice,
the
most
appropriate
choice
to
run
along
most
of
the
property
line?
I
How
is
this
short,
permeable
fence
going
to
address
the
concerns
stated
here
and
at
all
previous
written
petitions
and
community
discussions?
Why
aren't
we
replicating
the
existing
walls
dimensions?
If
the
city
decrees,
publicly
accessible
spaces
are
in
deemed
an
integral
part
of
our
quality
of
life
and
social
well-being.
Why
can
it
offer
exact
purpose-built
specifications
for
the
buffer
of
the
basketball
court
if
the
Harken
the
activities
that
Fosters
are
so
important?
Why
is
it
so
hard
to
commit
to
a
buffer
which,
to
finish
definitively
sets
out
to
do
this?
I
We've
received
in
writing
from
the
counselor's
office
that
a
barrier
will
be
maintained?
The
developer
has
indicated
the
7-foot
solid
wall
will
be
installed,
and
this
final
report
indicates
that
a
quote
taller
screening
element
in
the
area
of
the
basketball
court
will
be
required.
No
specifications
on
height
length,
materiality
permeability,
have.
I
A
I
A
As
the
staff
report
says,
the
specifications
of
the
barrier
that
are
gonna
be
discussed
is
something
that
takes
place
during,
what's
called
the
site
plan
process,
which
is
the
next
step.
We
don't
do
in
this
level
of
detail,
so
would
it
help
in
any
way
if
we
undertake
to
make
sure
that
the
community
is
engaged
in
the
conversation
during
the
site
plan
process
about
how
that
barrier
would
work?
Is
that.
I
A
J
You
just
provide
a
little
bit
of
a
little
bit
more
context
to
some
of
the
comments
that
have
been
made
and
some
of
the
discussion
points
in
the
in
the
staff
report.
The
site
is
just
located
on
the
south
side
of
Wabash
Avenue,
immediately
to
the
east
of
the
chalghi
Williams
Park,
and
through
this
process
the
Parks
Department
have
asked
for
an
on-site
parkland
dedication
to
essentially
widen
the
Charles
G
Park
in
an
east/west
dimension.
J
It's
would
be
widened
by
1.5
metres
of
an
on-site
parkland
dedication
and
including
included
in
that,
as
a
condition
that
the
the
the
edge
condition
the
barrier,
the
wall
that
should
separate
between
the
development
site
and
the
room
and
the
new
park.
Expanded
Park,
is
to
be
worked
out
through
the
site
plan
process.
J
The
site
today
is
currently
occupied
by
a
three
storey,
former
industrial
and
warehouse
building
with
a
single-story
at
the
rear.
The
building
itself
has
been
determined
to
have
contextual
historical
value
and,
as
such,
a
recommendation
was
adopted
by
Toronto
Preservation
Board
last
week
to
designate
the
existing
structure.
The
existing
structure
will
be
altered
to
add
an
additional
single
storey
above
the
existing
structure.
J
The
proposal
meets
all
of
the
city's
requirements
in
terms
of
neighborhood
policies.
There
is
a
five
and
a
half
metre
setback
to
the
abutting
neighborhoods
to
the
south
of
the
subject
site.
There
is
a
5.5
metre
setback
to
the
mutual
property
line
to
our
neighbor
to
the
east,
which
is
also
a
four-story
residential
development.
You
can
see
highlighted
in
red
the
area
of
the
existing
building
to
be
retained.
We've
Illustrated
on
this
site
plan
as
well
the
strip
of
new
parkland
1.5
meters
that
is
to
be
dedicated
and
conveyed
to
the
city.
J
We
we
agree
with
the
recommendation
to
undertake
further
consultation
around
the
actual
design,
materiality
and
extent
of
the
barrier
or
wall
between
the
development
site
and
the
and
the
the
basketball
court.
We
certainly
heard
that
through
what
I
thought
was
a
collaborative
consultation
both
in
terms
of
pre
application,
consultation
and
drawing
the
process
as
well,
and
we
certainly
encourage
you
to
adopt
staffs
recommendations
and
and
thank
both
staff
and
the
ward
councillor
and
I'm
available
to
answer
any
particular
questions
that
you
might
have.
A
Thank
you,
I'm
Bruce,
any
questions
No,
so
I
just
want
to
I
thought.
I
heard
it,
but
I
just
want
to
nail
it
down.
You're
willing.
Your
client
is
willing
to
engage
with
the
community
my
office
in
the
planning
department
and
a
conversation
on
the
materiality
and
dimensions
of
the
fence
between
the
basketball
court
and
the
property.
That
is
correct.
Yes,
all
right
there
we
go
all
nailed
down.
Okay!
Thank
you
very
much.
Are
there
any
other
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
this
item,
seeing
none
any
questions
of
staff?
A
No
okay,
I'll
speak
I,
move
that
we
adopt
the
staff
report
and
with
great
thanks
to
Kirk
and
the
rest
of
the
team
from
planning
on
handling
a
very
complex
and
very
sensitive
local
issue.
Part
of
the
conversation
here
had
to
do
with
a
memorial
mural
that
I
think
city
staff
handled
very
well
as
well
as
all
the
other
complex
issues
of
bringing
four-story
housing
into
a
neighborhood
next
to
a
park.
I
know
if
this
was
any
other
community
council.
A
B
D
I
do
and
the
questions
are
related
to
regarding
the
heritage.
Alteration
request
from
the
applicant
I
understand
that
there
was
a
very
robust
discussion
at
the
Preservation
Board
and
I
recognize
that
councillor
Laden
was
not
there,
so
I'm
trying
to
understand
exactly
what
transpired.
So
there
is
correspondence
from
the
Preservation
Board
that
has
flagged
some
concerns
and
and
to
make
sure
that
we
are
all
fully
understanding
what
those
concerns
for
are
I'm
just
going
to
probably
try
to
contextualize
those
questions
and
repeat
them
today.
So
my
question:
the
staff
starts
off
with.
J
Through
the
chair,
Thank
You
councillor
one
time,
the
subject:
property
is
on
the
opposite
side
of
Church
Street
to
the
north
of
the
Cathedral.
So
the
Cathedral
is
a
shooter
and
Church,
whereas
191
through
197
Church
Street
are
mid
block
properties
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
street
to
the
north.
So.
D
In
the
correspondence
from
the
Toronto
Preservation
Board,
they
stated
that
the
application
and
the
Basilica
were
directly
across
the
street
from
each
other.
It's
it
seems
to
be
that
it's
not
exactly
the
case,
but
rather
the
Basilica
is
on
the
south
side
of
shooter
Street,
and
so
therefore,
it's
it's
of
the
application
kitty-corner
to
the
application
about
not
directly
across
the
street.
Is
that
correct,
Oh
through.
J
D
You
very
much
Joe
and
with
respect
to
the
concerns
that
that
the
members
had
regarding
whether
or
not
staff
heritage
preservation
staff
did
their
due
diligence
to
inch
to
review
the
application
in
context
to
st.
Michael's
Cathedral.
There
is
some
concern
that
perhaps
staffs
didn't
do
a
fulsome
job.
How
would
you
respond
to
that
through.
J
The
chair,
Thank
You,
counselor
I,
would
beg
to
differ.
That
staff
did
in
fact
take
this
into
consideration
as
we
identified
this
as
an
adjacent
property.
Within
the
analysis,
although
we
also
took
into
into
the
consideration
that
it's
it's
close
proximity
rather
than
adjacency
was
a
factor,
but
I
would
say
that
staff
did
take
this
into
consideration
in
the
evaluation
recommendations
can.
D
You
share
with
community
council.
What
does
that
consideration
and
adequate
review?
Look
like?
Were
there
images
that
were
shown
were
you?
Did
you
ask
for
additional
supporting
documentation
for
the
application
for
alteration
was?
Were
there
particular
area
context
drawings
that
you
saw
that
perhaps
the
Preservation
Board
did
not
get
a
chance
to
see.
J
So
we
I
guess
pages
12
through
15
of
the
staff
report.
We
do
indicate
essentially
the
immediate
context
with
mapping
and
the
site
plan
and
of
some
renderings
three-dimensional
renderings
and,
to
be
honest,
given
the
the
distance
of
the
Cathedral
from
the
subject,
property
I
believe
that
we
did
have
a
look
at
renderings
for
the
the
block
in
general,
but
because
there,
because
of
the
distance
we
we
didn't
add
that
information
to
the
report
and
in
future
I
think
that
would
be
an
oversight
that
we
would
so.
D
It
sounds
like
you
would
be
rejecting
the
the
the
statement
from
the
Preservation
Board
that
you
did
not
treat
this
application
with
the
same
consideration
as
as
preservation
staff
did
when
they
were
considering
heritage,
contacts
and
adjacencies
with
the
st.
James
Cathedral.
Would
you
would
you
agree
to
that?
Because
there
is
claims
that
you
didn't
give
it
the
same
due
diligence
to.
J
The
chair,
I
would
beg
to
differ
with
the
opinion
offered
in
the
letter
that
we
did
give
it
due
consideration
for
the
conservation
of
the
heritage,
value
of
on
the
subject,
site
and
of
adjacent
properties
and
I.
Think
we've
addressed
those
fairly
substantially
through
the
set
back
from
the
street
wall
of
the
proposed
tower
and
in
addition,
removal
of
the
southern
portion
of
that
you
proposed
structure
to
create
more
buffer
and
breathing
space
between
the
town
where
the
proposed
and
and
adjacent
heritage.
So.
D
D
D
D
D
Those
in
sorry
do
your
job
and
with
respect
to
item
number
seven,
which
is
the
intention
to
designate
the
the
subject
properties
and
to
approve
the
alterations.
What
I'd
like
to
do
is
move
the
recommendations
from
the
preservation
board,
identifying
approval
of
recommendation,
one
two
three
and
four
in
the
original
staff
report,
but
but
obviously
supported
by
the
preservation
board
and
then
move
the
recommendations.
D
Five,
six
and
seven
in
the
heritage
staff
report,
which
is
to
approve
the
alteration,
requests
and
I
want
to
thank
staff
for
doing
their
their
their
work,
both
planning
staff,
as
well
as
heritage
staff
transportation.
Everyone
else
has
been
involved
in
the
process.
I
recognize
that
the
the
debate
that
transpired
at
the
preservation
board
and
I
apologize
as
I
was
not
necessarily
there
I'm,
no
longer.
Member
of
that
preservation
board,
but
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
the
preservation
board
is
given
as
much
consideration
and
their
opinions
are
deeply
valued.
D
As
myself,
who
has
been
a
former
member
for
eight
years
of
that
board,
so
I
needed
to
satisfy
myself
to
the
fact
that
any
particular
concerns
that
the
Heritage
Preservation
staff,
perhaps
may
have
erred
in
their
judgment.
I
was
going
to
be
satisfied
today
in
this
particular
forum
and
I
and
I'm
very
satisfied
with
the
the
whether
the
answers
from
staff
I
want
to
thank
them
for
further
due
diligence.
I
know
that
this
application
did
not
necessarily
just
fly
through
quickly.
D
It
literally
took
many
many
months
and
it
was
a
drawn-out
process
as
we
tussled
with
how
to
fit
this
application
into
the
particular
area,
but
also
in
recognized
saying
that
there
is
a
lot
of
significant
history,
contextual
contextual
requirements
that
had
to
be
considered.
I
think
that
it's
important
for
us
to
recognize
that
density
is
going
to
come
in
to
the
downtown
core.
We
are
designated
for
growth
and
we
continue
to
manage
the
growth.
D
So,
therefore,
we
can
have
adequate
green
space
and
farmland
to
grow
the
food
and
the
agriculture
that
we
need
to
sustain
human
life
in
the
GTHA
and
beyond.
So
when
we
take
on
that
additional
density
and
additional
growth,
we
want
to
do
the
very
best
that
we
can
to
make
sure
that
it
is
going
to
be
carefully
sustainable,
but
it
also
it's
going
to
fit
into
the
area
context.
D
I
want
to
thank
that
the
developer,
because
I
know
that
for
the
members
of
the
garden
district
residents
Association,
they
were
very
supportive
and
it
should
be
noted
that
they
were
extremely
supportive
of
this
application.
They
did
not
come
out
and
say:
no,
they
came
out
and
said
how
do
they
get
to
the
yes
and
I
know
that
the
applicant
worked
very
hard
to
make
sure
that
every
per
every
area,
reson
concerns
were
dealt
with.
Those
who
lived
on
Dalhousie
those
who
lived
on
Church
Street
been
north
and
south
adjacencies.
D
All
of
that
was
considered
and
I
that
takes
time
and
energy
and
I
just
want
to
thank
them
for
working
so
respectfully,
with
the
community
and
also
being
with
so
patient
and
working
respectfully
from
staff
I.
Think
it's
a
good
application.
The
entire
section
37
component
is
going
directly
to
affordable
housing
or
investments
in
community
facilities
and
Recreation
spaces.
So
overall
I
would
consider
this
a
very
good
development
for
the
for
this
particular
neighborhood.
Okay,
very
much
so.
A
A
A
K
K
I'd
like
to
thank
everyone
for
being
here,
though
I.
Do
wonder
why
we
are
here
having
this
discussion
frankly
for
this
application
to
demolish
rental
units.
These
are
the
homes.
These
are
people's
primary
residences.
Think
about
your
home
for
a
minute.
Our
homes
are
being
taken
away
from
us
and
this
application
is
pointless
because
16
of
these
recognized
units
have
already
been
destroyed.
K
Like
these,
if
the
photograph
could
actually
show
up,
but
that's
a
picture
of
a
demolished
floor,
I
can
leave
these
photographs
for
people
who
want
to
look
at
it.
9
of
the
16
units
have
been
either
completely
destroyed
or
partially
destroyed.
So
why
are
we
talking
about
this
application
in
front
of
the
Community
Council
and
in
front
of
City
Council
at
the
end
of
the
month?
It's
already
happened.
So
what
is
the
point
of
this?
K
It
seems
to
me
that
all
it
is
is
an
exchange
of
money
between
the
developer
and
the
city,
because
that's
what
the
application?
That's
the
form
of
the
application,
it
lists
clearly
all
the
sums
of
money
that
have
to
be
exchanged
and
every
time
we've
spoken
to
our
representative
and
we've
spoken
to
many
of
them.
The
response
we've
gotten
is
just
take
the
money
and
leave
go
away.
We
are
just
too
busy
to
deal
with
you.
K
K
K
K
Here
we
go
within
the
Kingsford
ina
and
King
Parliament
cultural
precincts.
The
following
will
be
encouraged
policy.
Twelve
point,
six
point:
one:
the
clustering
of
cultural
industries
and
cultural
sector,
economic
activities,
jobs
and
cultural
spaces,
1262
building
attributes
to
support
the
spatial
requirements
of
creative
industries
and
cultural
sector
and
allow
for
flexible
use
of
the
spaces,
which
is
exactly
what
we're
doing
right
now.
K
So
what
is
it
it's
all
about
money?
Isn't
it
we're
currently
paying
$17.80
a
square
foot
on
average
after
the
East
Room
and
hallmark
have
done
their
proposal.
The
general
public
will
be
charged
three
hundred
and
fifty
dollars
per
square
foot
per
year,
so
my
rent
I
pay
right
now.
Two
thousand
four
hundred
fifty
dollars
a
month
after
hallmark,
has
had
their
way.
That
will
be
seventeen
thousand
one
hundred
and
fifty
dollars
a
month.
So
Felix.
K
A
L
We're
happy
to
be
here
in
support
of
the
staff
recommendation
and
what
our
client
proposes
to
do,
as
you
saw
from
the
report,
is
to
make
a
very
substantial
capital
investment
in
this
quite
elderly
building
now,
in
order
to
restore
it
and
add
to
it
and
unable
to
continue
to
serve
the
uses
that
it's
been
zoned
for
since
time
immemorial,
and
those
uses
are
industrial,
as
you
saw
from
the
report,
residential
uses
are
not
permitted
on
that
site.
So.
A
L
Thank
you
so
as
I
know
that
the
industrial
uses
are
there's
a
wide
range
of
industrial
uses,
contemplated
and
permitted
on
that
site,
residential
uses
or
not.
There's
a
very
narrow
of
artists
live
work,
uses
that
are
permitted.
None
of
none
of
the
current
tendencies
meet
that
anywhere
near
that
definition.
There
is
work
ongoing
in
the
building.
All
of
that
work
is
as
permitted
by
current
outstanding
permits.
The
tenants
certainly
have
not
been
registered
about
calling
in
building
inspectors
who've
been
through
the
building.
Many
many
times.
L
They've
confirmed
that
there
is
all
of
the
work
is,
is
going
in
accordance
with
the
plans
and
issued
permits
in
terms
of
mr.
woods
woods
comments
about
payments,
the
payments
are
in
accordance
with
the
term
sheet
and
the
standard
terms
in
the
term
sheet.
They
are
going
to
the
tenants
rather
than
to
the
city,
and
mr.
Clute
has
been
involved
in
in
working
out.
That
term
sheet
with
our
client
were
its
complete
release
is
supported.
L
We
met
with
obviously
staff
many
times.
We've
also
met
with
the
tenants,
both
as
a
large
group
and
with
smaller
groups
of
tenants.
Several
times
exchanged
many
emails
with
them
and
are
prepared
to
continue
to
discuss
things
with
them
as
this
process
continues.
But
in
the
meantime
we
would
ask
that
you
that
you
that
you
adopt
the
recommendation
of
your
staff
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have.
Thank.
A
A
L
Want
to
mention
that
the
the
zoning
of
the
building
at
507,
King
Street
East,
has
been
industrial
live/work
and,
as
as
was
stated,
we
are
residents
of
that
building.
There
seems
to
be
a
problem
with
the
definition
of
live
work
there.
It
would
suggest
that
we
are
entitled,
as
residents
to
be
there
as
live
work,
because
that's
the
situation
that
we're
in
I.
L
A
D
You
very
much
and
thank
you
to
all
the
deputies
who
appear
before
us
today.
This
is
a
particular
file
that
my
staff
and
I
have
struggled
with
and
we
are
going
to
rely
very
heavily
on
the
advice
of
our
professional
planning
staff,
but
I
do
have
some
some
questions.
I'd
like
to
have
clarified
before
us
today.
The
staff
report
stipulates
that
the
subject
property
is
zoned
in
the
industrial
district,
known
as
i1
d3
and
as
such
residential
uses
are
not
permitted.
D
D
N
Understanding
of
the
bylaw
is,
is
that
residential
uses
are
not
a
permitted
use,
but
there
is
a
nun
within
the
non-residential
use
category.
There
is
an
opportunity
for
a
form
I
believe
it
is
an
artist
live
work
which
we
would
interpret
to
be
essentially
an
ancillary
function
to
one
of
the
the
industrial
or
manufacturing
uses.
So
therefore,.
D
Even
though
there
are
there,
even
though
technically
it's
not
a
strict
residential
permitted
use,
there
is
some
language
that
allows
for
artists
or
sort
of
creative
uses
live
workspace.
The
the
tenants
and
deputies
who
appeared
before
us
today
are
suggesting
and
stating
very,
very
passionately
to
not
tear
down
their
homes.
What
would
be
what?
What
is
the
city
response?
What
is
the
staff
recommendation
before
us
today?
The.
N
City
response,
the
staff
recommendation
is
that
residential
uses
are
not
a
permitted
use.
The
site
is
zoned
under
an
i1
d3
industrial
district
zoning
category
and
the
the
landowner
is
not
filed
a
zoning
amendment
application
to
introduce
the
permission
for
residential
uses.
So,
therefore,
what
our
process
is
through
the
residential
demo
bylaw
is
to.
We
have
recognized
the
existing
tenants
on
the
property
and
secured
a
tenant,
relocation
and
assistant
package,
because
replacing
residential
uses
on
the
lens
is
not
an
option
and
in.
D
N
D
D
In
light
of
the
fact
that
you
are
pursuing
this
sort
of
tenant
relocation
and
assistance
package,
despite
the
fact
that
City
Planning
is
not
recognizing
residential
use
in
this
building,
because
it's
not
permitted
in
the
in
the
the
current
zoning,
why
is
it
that
you
are
on
one
hand
saying
residential
uses
are
not
permitted?
But
while
we
see
that
there
are
tenants
who
are
living
in
this
unpermitted
unsewn
of
sort
of
in
you
know
sort
of
office
zone
building
because
it's
not
permitted.
Why
are
you
providing
this
assistance?
N
Doing
that
we
are
actually
just.
We
are
recognizing
that
people
have
lived
in
this
building
for
years
and
that
that
that
they
are,
this
is
their
home
and
they
are
being
relocated.
And
while
we
cannot
compel
the
lands
to
be
rezone,
we
do
recognize
the
residential
tenants.
And
so
we
do
provide
an
assistant
package
for
them
and.
D
N
L
The
chair,
counselor,
there
is
obviously
an
exercise-
that's
ongoing
right
now
in
terms
of
the
King
Parliament
secondary
plan
review
and
as
part
of
that,
there
will
be
a
revisiting
of
the
zoning
in
this
general
area
and
all
throughout
the
King
Parliament
area,
as
you
probably
know,
so
that
will
be
an
opportunity
at
that
point
to
look
at
future
uses.
But,
as
my
colleague
has
said
right
now,
the
current
zoning
for
this
property
does
not
allow
for
the
residential
use.
L
D
You,
and
with
respect
to
with
respect
to
this
particular
report,
it's
not
accompanied
with
anything
else,
so
there
is
no
alteration
to
the
building.
There
is
obviously
no
rezoning
final
report,
it's
simply
a
tenant
that,
where
the
demolition
and
tenant
assistance
report,
what
exactly
permissions
is
the
applicant
seeking.
D
D
N
Outline
on
page
four
of
the
staff
report
under
the
tenant
assistance
plan
the
it
includes
at
least
five
months
notice
of
the
date.
They
must
vacate
their
rental
unit
compensation
equal
to
three
months:
rent
pursuant
to
the
Residential
Tenancies
Act,
a
1500
moving
allowance
to
move
out,
as
well
as
additional
compensation
based
on
length
of
tenure
within
the
building
and
at
the
discretion
of
the
chief
planner.
Any
additional
compensation
or
assistance
for
special
needs.
Tenants.
D
N
So
an
amount
equal
to
five
months,
rent
for
anyone
whose
tenancy
is
less
than
five
years,
an
amount
equal
to
six
month,
rent
whose
Tennessee
is
between
five
and
ten
years.
Seven
months,
rent
for
ten
to
fifteen
years,
eight
months,
rent
fifteen
to
twenty
ten
months,
rent
twenty
to
thirty
twelve
months,
rent
beyond
thirty
and
can.
D
N
D
Thank
you,
I'm,
going
to
move
the
recommendations
in
the
staff
report
and
I
do
so
with
with,
to
be
quite
honest
with
a
heavy
heart.
This
has
been
a
very
difficult
file
for
everyone
to
grapple
with,
especially
those
in
my
office
who
have
been
meeting
with
with
some
of
the
tenants
and
sort
of
listening
to
their
concerns.
But
the
challenge
before
us
is
that
we
don't
know
sister
I,
don't
know
if
it's,
because
we
don't
necessarily
have
a
policy.
D
That's
comprehensive
enough
to
sort
of
grab
these
sort
of
loopholes,
but
just
like
the
the
the
rooming
house
policy
that
didn't
we
necessarily
have
in
place.
There
was
a
group
of
very
vulnerable
tenants,
especially
in
the
rooming
house
situation.
It
is
on
the
low
end,
end
of
the
the
the
rental
spectrum
and
we
had
a
very
difficult
time
to
protect
that
type
of
housing.
D
Stock
I
recognize
that
this
is
not
exactly
the
same,
and
especially
since
we
have
what
seems
to
be
a
new
prospect,
a
new
owner
who
has
purchased
this
particular
building
without
fully
recognizing
that
there
were
people
who
are
living
there.
So
what
they
purchased
was
a
was
a
was
a
warehouse
that
was
largely
with
some
type
of
creative
uses,
mostly
industrial,
manufacturing
and
and
and
and
light
manufacturing
and
and
when
they
took
possession.
D
They
then
realized
that
there
were
folks
living
there
so
for
some
reason,
I
think
that
there
was
I
believe
there
was
some
dishonesty
from
the
from
the
original
owner
who
then
sold
to
this
particular
applicant
and
didn't
disclose
fully
what
was
going
on
within
the
building.
So
I
can't
go
back
in
time.
It's
really
hard
to
do
because
it's
it's
not
necessarily.
D
You
know
the
the
the
the
new
owners
fault
that
this
is
something
that
they
walked
into,
but
at
the
same
time
we
have
folks
who
have
been
calling
this
building
their
home
for
a
number
of
years
who
are
now
faced
with
a
situation
where,
where
they're
stuck
in
a
conundrum,
because
we
have
a
planning
regime
that
doesn't
quite
address
this
particular
piece.
So
in
this
case,
I
actually
don't
see
any
villains
here,
I
think
everyone
is
trying
to
do
their
job,
but
unfortunately,
there's
a
system
and
a
structure
that
doesn't
quite
adequately
address.
D
What
seems
to
be
a
willing
prop?
Who
kind
of
inherited
the
Pro
is
a
situation
without
fully
knowing
what
was
before
them
and-
and
everyone
is
struggling
in
this
turmoil
as
they're
as
they're
pitching
around
we
don't
have
a
policy
fix.
I
can't
create
one
on
the
fly.
The
only
thing
that
we're
left
with
is
to
follow
the
advice
of
the
staff
recommendation,
but
also
to
encourage
continued
dialogue
with
the
the
tenants
and
and
their
new
landlord
and
and
if
there
is
a
way
to
to
find
a
there's
a
way
to
address
this.
D
D
We
didn't
know
how
to
to
particularly
find
this
together,
but
I'd
also
reckon
I
also
want
to
just
say
that
I
particularly
don't
think
that
there's
any
one
stakeholder
that
walked
into
any
of
this
that
wanted
to
inflict
intentional
harm
that
I'm,
very
confident
of
and
I
know
that
the
staff
have
done
everything
they
possibly
can
to
try
to
provide
supports
for
the
tenants
and-
and
this
is
kind
of
where
we
are
I-
apologize-
that
we
couldn't
necessarily
do
better.
Today.
A
Okay,
any
questions,
a
mover,
no
seeing
none
anyone
else
to
speak
all
right,
then,
on
the
on
the
item,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
all
right.
That
takes
us
to
te
thirteen
point:
five
925
Dawes
Road
zoning
bylaw
amendment
application
request
for
directions
report.
Are
there
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
this
item?
A
The
staff
recommendations,
all
those
in
favor,
opposed
carried
item
te
13.6
inclusion
on
the
City
of
Toronto
Heritage
Register,
an
intention
to
designate
under
part
four
section:
29
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
alterations
to
a
heritage,
pretty
an
authority
to
enter
into
a
heritage.
Easement
agreement,
41
Wabash
Avenue,
say
that
six
times
fast
are
there
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
this
item?
Seeing
none
I'll
move
the
staff
recommendations,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried.
Seven.
We've
done
item
te.
A
A
D
F
A
A
Aware
of
that,
and
when
we
do
our
agenda
briefing
where
we
set
the
agenda,
it's
often
before
we
have
the
report
in
from
preservation
services.
So
there's
just
it's
messy
and
complicated
to
make
the
agenda
work.
I
perfectly
there's
also
issues
around
notifying
the
public
that
has
to
go
out
in
advance
the
meeting
and,
finally
because
their
different
decisions
they
have
to
be
placed
as
separate
items
on
the
agenda,
so
I
well,
I
appreciate
a
best
of
the
clerks
of
the
failure
here.
A
A
Was
all
ears
okay,
now
that
we're
all
through
that
very
complicated
moment,
I
believe
I'm
on
nine
right.
Yeah
item
te,
thirteen
point:
nine
partial
repeal
an
amendment
a
designating
bylaw
158
sterling
Road.
Are
there
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
that
item?
I
see
none!
Are
there
any
questions
of
staff?
No
councillor
Bradford.
A
O
Gro
I'm,
a
lawyer
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
owner,
mrs.
rina,
a
Caputo
I,
want
to
start
by
thanking
staff
in
particular
samsara
cosh,
who
helped
us
get
this
matter
before
you,
the
request
before
you
as
a
demolition
permit,
and
we
are
before
you
because
we
don't
have
a
building
permit
application
filed
the
owner
of
the
property,
is
a
widow.
O
Her
spouse
passed
away
in
November
they've
owned
the
property
since
1964
in
March
of
2019.
They
had
entered
where
we're
about
to
the
eve
of
entering
into
an
agreement
of
purchase
and
sale
of
the
property
and
tragedy
ensued.
You
may
know
that
the
properties
were
burnt
down.
In
fact,
the
tragedy
was
so
severe
that
a
young
man
passed
hence
we're
here
almost
a
year
later,
dealing
with
insurance,
always
fun
and
in
a
situation
where
the
current
owner
would
like
to
sell
the
property
and
to
sell
the
property,
the
building's
need
to
be
demolished.
O
That's
the
back
story,
the
facts
before
you
involve
an
engineer's
report
and
a
subsequent
report.
That
report
was
prepared
for
the
insurer.
The
report
speaks
to
demolition
as
appropriate
in
the
circumstances
and
I
wanted
to
make
myself
available
this
morning
on
behalf
of
the
owner.
Should
you
have
any
questions?
Thank
you.
A
A
O
And
the
only
thing,
I
would
add,
is
I
understand
you
have
a
decision
to
make
based
on
three
recommendations.
The
owner,
of
course,
would
ask
that
you
pursue
recommendation
or
adopt
recommendation
number
two,
which
is
to
approve
the
application
to
demolish
the
vacant
residential
building
without
any
conditions.
O
B
You,
chair
and
I
will
be
moving
recommendation,
3,
which
is
to
have
approved
the
demolition
with
conditions
I.
Just
four
members
of
the
committee
background.
There
was
a
tragic
fire
that
occurred
here
and
a
fire
that
resulted
in,
unfortunately,
the
loss
of
life
and
a
large
community
outpouring
of
support
and
fundraising
for
tenants
as
well.
B
Afterwards,
friends
engineering
has
been
retained,
they've
assessed
the
damage
and
have
recommended
that
the
buildings
be
demolished,
and
so
it's
on
that
basis
that
we
are
recommending
this,
though,
of
course
it
is
with
conditions
so
that
it's
demolished
but
properly
fenced
and
sawed
it
as
opposed
to
sitting
there
fallow
yeah.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
B
A
A
A
P
Right,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
address
the
the
council
I'm
here,
with
kind
of
I,
think
discuss
a
novel
approach
to
finding
a
balance
between
supporting
owners
rights
to
build
what
they
want,
while
preserving
unique
character
of
our
uncontested
ly,
important
Casa
Loma
area.
While
we
might
be
one
of
the
most
historical
areas
in
the
city,
I
think
the
residents
who
live
there
are
some
of
the
most
innovative
and
open
to
adaptive
kind
of
evolution
to
finding
the
right
balance.
So
I
wanted
to
just
share
some
facts.
P
Without
disputed
Casa
Loma
area
was
selected
as
a
priority
area
for
heritage
designation,
with
an
HCD
study
funded
by
the
city
and
taxpayer
dollars.
The
HDD
process
was
widely
communicated
was
a
very
public
process,
including
prominence
on
our
own
website.
The
CLR
HRO
no
com
I
would
encourage
you
all
to
visit
that
site
because
it
has
some
fantastic
documents
about
our
history.
The
report
was
made
public
on
July
12,
2018
included,
two
Complete
Streets
and
the
limited
number
of
special
properties
identified
for
further
study
as
contributing
properties.
P
136
linters,
one
of
the
oldest
houses
and
original
houses
on
the
street
is
one
of
those
select
contributing
properties
that
was
identified
by
the
independent
heritage
consultants.
There
are
also
significant
old-growth
heritage
trees.
That
would
be
negatively
impacted,
should
there
be
a
demolition
and
a
new
build.
We
also,
in
addition,
retained
an
independent
heritage
architect,
who
also
confirmed
that
some
of
the
flamboyant
window
design
elements
are
not
only
unique
to
the
Casa
Loma
area
but
citywide
as
well.
P
P
Until
we
objected,
the
CLR
a
strongly
supports
adaptive,
reuse
of
heritage
structures,
and
we've
successfully
achieved
this
with
seven
Austin,
Terrace
and
72
wells
still,
where
only
the
facade
elements
are
retained,
with
significant
alterations
accepted
by
the
CLR,
a
and
heritage
services
to
allow
the
owner
to
build
their
magnificent
home
that
they
built
without
destroying
the
character
and
presence
on
the
street.
We
would
like
to
assist
the
owner
with
this
with
his
plans
for
a
new
home,
an
only
request
that
the
facade
be
capped
and
incorporated
into
the
new
home.
P
Just
look
at
72
Wells
Hill
to
see
how
it
can
be
done
in
a
way
that
gives
the
owner
his
new
home.
They
deserve,
while
preserving
the
contributing
heritage
to
this
unique
important
area
which
the
owners
have
already
admitted
they
value
and
appreciate,
which
is
why
they
wanted
to
buy
their
home
here.
So
please
suspend
demolition
application
until
we
have
a
chance
to
constructively
negotiate
a
solution
that
helps
preserve
the
unique
character
of
our
special
Casa
Loma
area.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
Q
You
very
much
good
morning,
mr.
chairman
and
members
of
community
council,
my
name
is
Eileen
Costello
I'm,
a
solicitor,
a
dear
furless
and
I'm
counsel
to
Matthew
Curtin
who's,
the
owner
of
the
property
I'm.
You
have
correspondents
from
media
February
3rd
2020,
which
also
encloses
a
visual
illustrating
for
you.
The
proposed
new
home
on
the
property
and
I
wanted
to
just
address
some
of
the
comments
from
mr.
levy.
Q
I'd
also
note,
Community
Council
has
I,
think
9
or
10
pieces
of
Correspondence
from
immediate
neighbors
in
the
area
who
have
indicated
that
they
have
no
objection
to
the
demolition
application
and
in
fact
they
take
issue
with
mr.
Levy's
comments
in
terms
of
him
representing
the
entire
community.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
that
right
now.
What
I
want
to
do
is
talk
about.
As
mr.
Levy
indicated
the
undisputed
facts,
there
was
a
heritage,
HCD
process
which
was
commenced
in
2005,
with
the
City
Council
identifying
this
area.
The
study
itself
came
forward
in
2018.
Q
The
study
and
staffs
recommendation
did
not
include
this
street.
It
recommended
to
HCD
studies,
Wells
Street
and
Hill.
Street
I
believe
didn't
include
this
street
at
all.
In
the
HCD
recommendation,
so
staffs
first
determination
with
respect
to
heritage
was
to
not
include
this
street
in
the
hcg
study.
The
second
determination
which
mr.
levy
speaks
to
he
references
this
property
being
identified
as
contributing
that's
not
the
case.
The
study
lists
every
single
property
on
Lyndhurst
and
says
it
should
be
reviewed.
Q
It
doesn't
identify
it
as
a
contributing
property
and,
of
course
it
couldn't
because
there
isn't
an
HCD
for
it
to
contribute
to
this
street
is
not
included
in
the
HCD.
The
third
piece
is
the
suggestion
that
my
client
or
representatives
of
my
client
knew
about
any
of
this.
You
know
respectfully
processes
are
well
publicized,
but
if
you've
purchased
a
property
in
July
of
2019,
which
is
when
my
client
purchased
his
property,
that
was
a
year
after
the
HCD
study
had
come
to
Toronto
Preservation
Board.
Q
There
was
no
public
notice
of
that
and
there's
certainly
nothing
registered
on
title
to
my
clients
property.
So
when
my
clients,
real
estate
solicitor,
did
his
title
search,
there
was
nothing
to
indicate
there
was
any
heritage
issue
for
this
property.
The
third
piece
and
I
think
it's
equally
important
is
the
suggestion
that
my
client
has
acted
somehow
in
bad
faith
or
inappropriately.
My
client
filed
a
zoning
review
last
summer.
This
file
has
been
under
processed
with
City
of
Toronto
planning
and
building
staff.
Q
My
client
worked
diligently
with
planning
staff
to
get
to
the
point
where
he
was
by
virtue
of
your
own
bylaw,
designing
a
house
which
maintains
the
nature
and
character
of
the
neighborhood,
because
that's
what
the
City
of
Toronto
zoning
bylaw
does
and
whence
that
rezoning
review
was
completed.
My
client
then
filed
his
application
for
a
replacement
building
permit
first
and
then
upon
request
from
City
of
Toronto
staff
filed
his
application
for
a
demolition
permit.
So
my
clients
done
nothing
wrong
here.
Q
There
was
no
attempt
to
mislead
the
community
and
when
you
don't
require
minor
variances,
there
is
not
an
obligation
to
share
the
plans
of
your
new
home
with
your
neighbors.
So
the
suggestion
that
my
client
should
have
come
forward
and
done
that
in
advance,
I,
don't
think,
is
reasonable
or
fair,
so
we're
here
in
a
circumstance
where
my
clients
done
nothing
wrong.
It's
done
everything
it
was
asked
to
do.
It
met
with
mr.
levy
with
the
councillors,
assistance
and
guidance,
and
we
thank
the
councillor
for
that.
Q
But
I
think
the
suggestion
that
the
front
facade
of
a
home,
which
is
neither
listed
nor
designated,
be
the
starting
point
for
this
proposal
is
not
reasonable
and
I.
Think
heritage
preservation
staff
would
take
issue
with
that
as
an
approach
to
heritage
from
the
outset.
So
we're
respectfully
requesting
that
staff
recommendation
number
three,
which
is
to
prove
the
demolition
permit,
with
condition
be
adopted,
we're
respectfully
requesting
that
this
matter
not
be
deferred
or
delayed
any
further
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
committee
may
have.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
questions,
the
deputed
seeing
none.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
Sorry,
sir.
You've
had
your
time.
Okay,
we
have
to
follow
our
process
here.
Are
there
any
other
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
this
item?
Seeing
none
are
there
any
questions
of
staff,
counselor
Motlow.
B
F
B
F
Councillor
Marlowe,
so
I
have
a
motion
which
I'm
going
to
explain
to
you,
which
is,
which
is
the
first,
the
first
recommendation
to
refuse
the
application
to
demolish
the
two-story
detached
dwelling
at
136
Lyndhurst
Avenue,
because
there
is
no
permit
to
replace
the
building
on
the
site
at
this
time.
So
this
has
been.
This
has
been
a
weird
one
and
a
difficult
one.
F
Rarely
if
ever
do
I
find
and
I
imagine
you
have
the
same
experiences
where
we
you
have
somebody
wanting
to
redevelop
a
home
without
requesting
a
minor
variances
and
going
to
committee
of
adjustment
and
now,
while
those
things
are
by
nature
more
controversial,
often
in
a
neighborhood
and
more
difficult
to
deal
with.
What
the
silver
lining
of
that
process
is
that
there
is
a
process
that
there's
a
process
triggered
to
notify
local
residents.
F
And
then
often
you
can
begin
that
often
difficult
uncomfortable,
sometimes
contentious
but
helpful
discussions,
so
that
perhaps
you
can
resolve
things
and
perhaps
at
least
lead
to
a
mediated
settlement
or
or
or
or
cut
it
off
before.
It
gets
to
to
the
hearing
in
this
case,
because
the
owner
didn't
request
any
variances
that
wasn't
triggered
and
the
Casa
Loma
residents
association
along
with
neighbors
were
were
left
in
the
dark,
because
a
process
isn't
doesn't
exist
to
provide
them
that
light
no
fault
of
the
owner.
F
There
was
no
onus
on
him
to
reach
out
to
the
neighbors.
He
wouldn't
have
known
what
he
was
supposed
to
do.
I
believe
he
did
actually
reach
out
to
the
adjacent,
neighbors
and
I
think
you
know
I
think
he
did
make
effort
to
do
his
due
diligence,
but
the
wider
community
was
unaware
of
what
was
going
on.
So
I
can
empathize
with
their
perspective
that
when,
when
they
hear
that,
there's
someone
wanting
to
redevelop
a
property
that
they
hear
about
it
over
the
holidays.
Nonetheless,
you
know
that
they
that
they
started
the
work
earlier.
F
But
that's
when
this
became
came
to
light
in
the
community
that
the
first
thing
that
comes
to
I
think
a
lot
of
people's
minds
with
a
dearth
of
information.
Is
you
know
the
information,
the
the
worry
that
they
fill?
That
gap
with,
which
is?
Is
this
going
to
be
another
one
of
those
builders
which
we
are
accustomed
to
in
Midtown
and
I
know
across
the
city?
That
is
just
doing
something
surreptitious.
They
want
to
kind
of
get
in
there
and
and
demolish
something
and
then
build
something
big
later
and
go
to
committee.
F
After
the
fact
they
were
worried
about
all
this
and
they
didn't
know
they
didn't
know.
Matthew
Curtin
so
see
lra
wrote
a
letter
raising
opposition,
and
this
is
why
I
was
bumped
up
to
community
council
I
reached
out
to
both
Matthew
and
to
Robert
in
the
CLR,
a
and
asked
them
and
I.
Think
of
the
way.
I
phrase
is:
let's
do
what
you
know
any
reasonable,
grown-up,
would
do,
which
is
before
this
turns
into
a
big
community
fight.
Let's
actually
sit
down
and
meet
at
my
office
and
see
if
we
can
resolve
the
differences.
F
The
difference
is
the
Delta
was
small.
Remarkably
I
did
not
hear
the
CLR
a
say
that
they
were
completely
opposed
to
any
type
of
demolition.
I
did
not
hear
that
they
were
opposed
to
every
and
anything
what
they
were
saying
was.
We
want
to
see
if
there
are
even
some
features
on
the
design
to
ensure
that
the
characteristics
of
this
home
in
particular
and
how
it
contributes
to
the
wider
neighborhood
are
protected
in
whatever
new
design
would
be
considered.
What
I
also
heard
from
mr.
F
Curtin
was
that
you
know
well,
he
did
sit
there
and
actively
listen
to
mr.
Levy's
submission
to
immers
request
to
him,
but
he
also
had
a
very
clear
vision
about
what
he
wanted
his
home
to
be
like
and
with
credit
to
to
mr.
Curtin.
He
wasn't.
He
wasn't
gonna
in
mr.
levy
ancillary,
a
hadn't
seen
this
design,
but
he
wasn't
considering
doing
something
that
had
stucco
around
or
some
one
of
those
boxes
box
houses
that
look
like
a
iPhone.
He
really
was
looking
at
I
think
very
thoughtful
features
such
as
brick,
facade,
all
round,
etc.
F
So
I
wanted
to
give
him
that
credit,
but
there
was
a
remaining
difference
of
opinion
about
the
design
and
how
it
would
contribute
or
or
take
away
from
the
character
of
the
neighborhood,
the
that
HCD
study
the
timeline
of
the
study
in
the
lack
of
completion
of
the
study
by
the
end
of
the
dates.
This
is
important,
I
think
led
to
ambiguity
that
created
a
bit
of
a
mess
here
and
no
fault
of
staff.
F
We
asked
them
to
do
a
lot
of
things
without
enough
resources
to
get
it
done,
but
they
did
not
have
the
resources
to
get
this
HCD
study
within
the
time
period
that
they
had
selected
initially,
and
what
this
led
to
is
a
lot
of
concern
by
the
community
that,
without
the
completion
of
the
study,
there
wouldn't
be
any
conclusive
opinion
about
what
should
become
of
this
home
in
the
community.
Ultimately,
heritage
planning
did
say
that
they
do
not
believe
that
this
house
will
contribute
to
that.
F
It
doesn't
merit
a
designation
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
and
therefore
we
cannot
request
that
it
be
protected
because
they
are,
they
are
not
recommending
that.
So
the
only
thing
that
I've
got
left
in
these
recommendations
is
that
I
cannot
support
a
demolition
without
a
permit
to
replace
the
building.
That
being
said,
I've
got
to
make
it
very
clear
there.
There
is
nothing
in
the
toolbox
that
the
city
has
that
can
prevent
an
owner
of
a
property
to
to
build
a
new
home
unless
it
is
designated
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
F
Curtiss
new
neighbor
would
want
to
also
be
part
of
that
that
journey,
because,
ultimately,
what
my
big
greatest
hope
is
is
that
a
resolution
will
still
be
able
to
be
found
between
neighbors,
so
that
there
is
both
a
respect
for
the
owner
moving
in,
but
also
respect
for
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
that
mr.
Curtin
is
moving
into.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
are
there
any
questions,
the
mover,
no
anyone
else
to
speak
to
the
item.
No
on
the
motion,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried.
Ok
that
takes
us
to
oh,
the
front
yard
parking
appeal
portion
of
the
meeting.
Mercifully,
there's
only
one,
this
time,
te
13.1
for
front
yard
parking
appeal,
9,
7,
8,
st.
Clarence,
Avenue
they're,
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
an
application
on
this
or
deputation
on
on
this
item.
A
Everyone's
a
winner,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
counselor
Matt.
Oh
no,
sir
I
do
have
five.
Sorry,
sorry,
yeah,
okay,
te,
thirteen
point:
one
five
refusal
of
a
boulevard
cafe
permit
application
located
at
two
to
six
one
Queen
Street
East,
Hammersmith
Avenue,
flanked
äj--.
Are
there
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
this
item?
A
A
A
A
A
Okay,
so
now
we're
gonna
go
through
the
held
items.
Item
te:
thirteen
point
two
to
60,
mil
Street
zoning
bylaw
amendment
application.
Preliminary
report,
I
have
a
deputy,
Dan
Phillips
dan.
If
you
could
come
forward
good
morning,
have
a
seat.
You'll
have
five
minutes
and
you
can
watch
your
time
over
here
on
the
wall
to
my
right,
I.
L
L
A
L
A
L
My
name
is
Mario
Angelou
Qi
I'm,
the
director
of
development
with
Easton's
group
of
hotels.
It's
a
very
brief
deputation.
We
filed
a
brand-new
application
for
this
property.
We
recently
purchased
this
property,
we're
very
excited
to
be
able
to
consider
bringing
a
much-needed
hotel
amenity
to
the
area
and
to
the
city
to
help
bolster
the
tourism
industry.
L
A
A
D
If
it's
required
and
I
know
that
people
are
council,
members
here
have
suggested
that
be
this
a
snack
clause
but
really
is,
as
is,
to
ensure
that
we
provide
extend
a
level
of
respect
to
residents
when
we're
asking
them
to
come
out
and
participate
in
the
planning
process.
Already,
it's
very
difficult,
extremely
challenging
for
resons
to
always
come
out
application
after
application
is
submitted.
We
ask
them
to
come
out
again
meeting
after
meeting
to
provide
us
their
advice
and
oftentimes.
It's
not
even
with
a
glass
of
water.
D
So
for
parents
who
have
young
children,
we
need
to
provide
a
childcare
accommodations
for
people
who
require
a
specific
sign
language
interpreter
a
interpretation
or
practice
captioning.
It's
the
very
least.
We
can
do
to
ensure
that
there
is
equitable
access
to
the
process
and
I
look
forward
to
to
having
that
public
discussion
with
the
community.
D
I
know
there
are
significant
concerns
with
the
application
I
heard
very
loud
and
clear
and
I
know
that
I
guess
the
applicant
will
have
to
really
sharpen
their
pencil
to
work
on
this
one
to
make
sure
that
they
can
not
just
not
this
to
just
address
the
community
but
concerns,
but
also
the
concerns
around
planning
staff
as
well,
and
thank
you
for
that.
Thank.
A
D
Motion
to
the
to
the
amendment
beyond
the
accomodations
piece
was
also
to
direct
staff
to
work
with
transportation,
services
parks,
forestry,
recreation
and
any
other
necessary
city
officials
to
create
a
working
group
in
to
consult
the
local
community
as
part
of
the
site
plan
process.
Oftentimes,
we
are
delegating
the
site
plan
matters
directly
to
staff
over
the
practice
of
my
tenure
here
in
the
second
term,
I
have
been
undulating
every
site
plan
application.
D
The
crime
prevention
through
Environmental
Design
principles,
all
that
has
gotta,
be
embedded
in
the
site
plan
and
then,
and
only
then,
will
we
undef.
After
all,
the
benefits
have
been
secured
on
behalf
of
the
community
and
and
I
want
to
thank
members
of
the
committee
for
letting
me
to
reopen
the
matter.
A
Have
the
gavel:
okay,
but
I'm
not
going
to
use
it.
So
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carry
item
as
amended
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried.
Okay.
Now
we
get
to
te
thirteen
point:
two:
three
Danforth
Avenue
planning
study,
City,
initiated
official
plan
amendment
preliminary
report,
Broadview
Avenue
to
Coxwell
Avenue.
We
have
a
deputed
Gideon.
Where
are
you
hi
come
on
up
I,
just
wanted
to
say
Gideon
and
anyone
else
from
the
community.
Councillor
Fletcher
had
intended
to
attend
this
meeting,
she's
quite
ill
and
and
at
home.
Otherwise
she
would
be
here
sorry.
O
To
hear
that
mr.
Chiu,
please
go
ahead:
Thank
You!
Mr.
chair,
you
noted
that
mr.
Phillips
was
your
favorite,
deputy
and
I
hope
to
be
your
second
favorite.
I
will
keep
my
remarks
brief
as
well,
but
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today.
I'm
a
Gideon
Forman
with
a
day,
it's
uzuki
foundation,
I'm
here
to
say
we're
happy
that
the
Danforth
study
is
considering
on
street
cycling
facilities.
We
think
they're
an
excellent
idea
and
urge
you
to
build
a
protected
bike
lane
pilot
on
Danforth
this
year.
O
Obviously,
bike
lanes
have
many
health
and
environmental
benefits,
especially
given
the
climate
emergency,
but
we
also
believe
they
bus
congestion
and
they
support
local
merchants
and
we're
not
the
only
folks
who
have
that
view.
Cycling
is
now
receiving
support
from
some
unlikely
places,
including
one
of
the
world's
most
respected,
consulting
firms.
Deloitte,
and
that's
part
of
my
message
to
you
today,
you
may
have
seen
this
report
that
Deloitte
brought
out
late
2019,
their
technology,
media
and
telecommunications.
O
Predictions
2020
report
makes
for
good
reading
and
Deloitte
says
that
by
2022,
we'll
see
tens
of
billions
of
more
bike
trips
globally,
translating
into
quote
fewer
car
trips
and
lower
emissions
with
spillover
benefits
for
traffic
congestion.
Unquote.
So
that's
right.
Folks,
the
consulting
giant
Deloitte
says
it
getting
people
out
of
cars
and
onto
a
bike,
busts
congestion,
it's
not
just
the
tree
huggers
who
are
saying
that
now,
but
the
big
guys,
but
the
company
believes-
and
this
is
important-
that
we
that
it
will
be
difficult
to
realize
cycling's
benefits
unless
cities
create
safer
infrastructure.
O
The
report
says,
and
I
quote
many
people
who
might
otherwise
embrace
cycling
are
frightened
off
by
the
prospect
of
sharing
a
crowded
road
with
big
metal
vehicles.
Unquote
Deloitte
suggests
that
bikes,
neither
own
section
of
the
road
and
in
our
view,
that
means
physically
separated
lanes
would
cycle
tracks
also
be
consistent
with
a
good
climate
for
business
experts
suggests
the
answer
is
yes,
a
2019
study
from
Toronto's
Centre
for
active
transportation.
Looked
at
the
economic
impact
of
placing
pilot
bike
lanes
on
Bloor
Street,
you
may
have
seen
their
study.
O
It
also
makes
for
good
reading
and
the
key
finding
from
that.
2019
study
is
and
I
quote
monthly
customer
spending
a
number
of
customers
served
by
merchants,
both
increased
on
Bloor
Street
during
the
pilot.
Unquote,
the
research
was
done
on
Bloor,
but
we
think
the
results
are
suggested
for
danforth,
because
the
two
streets
are
similar
over
80%
of
their
visitors
arrived
without
an
automobile.
O
Finally,
let
me
mention
that,
in
addition
to
the
other
virtues
of
bike
lanes,
they
are
really
popular
with
your
constituents
polling
done
just
last
month
by
eco
research
found
that
bike
lanes
are
supported
by
82%
of
east
york
residents
and
in
the
old
city
of
toronto.
Support
for
the
lanes
rises
to
83%.
You
may
have
seen
the
polling.
It
got
a
fair
bit
of
coverage
in
January
on
the
CBC.
O
B
O
B
If
you're
calling
for
a
pilot
in
2020
and
certainly
I've,
heard
that
from
a
number
of
residents
residence
groups,
businesses
is
there
an
opportunity
for
more
consultation
between
now
and
the
summer
time
of
2020
to
2020,
where,
where
you
could
go
out
and
speak
with
folks
and
listen
to
their
feedback?
Yes,.
B
O
A
B
A
R
Good
morning,
thank
you.
My
name
is
Jeff
Mercker
and
I'm.
The
senior
project
manager
for
Ellis
diamond
corporation,
who
are
currently
Co
constructing
the
well
project,
which
is
located
on
the
corner
of
Front,
Street
and
Spadina
I'm
here
today,
as
Ellis
dawn,
is
committed
to
working
with
the
city
of
Toronto,
the
Community
Council
and
the
neighbors
of
our
project
to
seek
a
Meech,
mutually
agreeable
solution
to
our
noise
exemption
application.
R
I'd
like
to
start
with
a
bit
of
background
on
our
application.
The
well
is
a
multi
building
complex
with
Ellis
dawn,
constructing
two
of
the
seven
buildings
in
the
complex.
Our
buildings
are
the
ones
right
on
the
corner
of
front
and
Spadina,
and
our
Co
construction
manager.
Del
Terra
is
building
the
other
five
buildings
further
west.
On
November
14th
2019
Elliston
submitted
a
noise
exemption
application
for
the
following
activities.
With
durations
into
the
spring
of
2021,
we
were
requesting
from
6
a.m.
to
7
a.m.
the
the
construction
hoist
and
tower
crane
startup
and
safety
activities.
R
We
are
also
requesting
at
Cisco
from
6
a.m.
to
7
a.m.
the
delivery
of
reinforcing
steel
and
hoisting
up
to
the
top
floor.
All
these
activities
are
our
quiet
activities
using
electric
tower
cranes,
electric
hoists
but
I'll
get
to
more
details
as
I
progress
here,
we're
also
looking
for
or
requesting
from
7:00
p.m.
to
11:00
p.m.
the
ability
to
install
curtain
wall
on
our
building
and
from
7:00
p.m.
to
11:00
p.m.
to
receive
deliveries
and
move
the
materials
up
to
the
floors
via
the
material
hoist
and
crane.
R
Our
original
application
was
rejected
on
November
21st,
and
it
was
due
to
a
counselor
who
rejected
our
application
and
we
reached
out
to
the
counselor's
office
to
find
out
why
our
applications
rejected
and
try
to
work
with
the
counselor
in
the
community
to
find
a
mutually
agreeable
solution
to
our
application
on
November
26.
We
also
also
submitted
our
noise
exemption
appeal
on
the
9th
of
December.
We
heard
back
from
the
counselor's
office
and
the
reason
we
received
was
that
we
needed
to
get
substantial
community
support
before
the
appeal
would
be
considered
so
along
those
lines.
R
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
before
we
submitted
our
application
for
a
noise
exemption,
we
engaged
Eric
who
sticks
engineering
to
complete
a
noise
impact
study
in
the
community.
They
put
monitoring
stations
around
the
site,
five
of
them
and
monitored
the
amp,
monitored
the
ambient
noise
in
the
community
for
a
period
of
two
weeks.
R
They
then
took
this
information
modeled
the
ambient
noise
in
the
neighborhood
against
our
proposed
construction
activities
outside
of
the
the
bylaw
hours
and,
through
their
analysis,
they've
determined
that
the
proposed
activities
will
result
in
minimal
impact
east
of
the
site,
but
basically
Spadina
way,
south
of
the
site
across
the
tracks
and
the
telegram
news,
but
there
will
be
slightly
no
noticeable
noise,
north
of
the
site
on
Wellington
and
west
towards
Draper.
In
our
report,
we
also
proposed
mitigation
plans
and
the
mitigation
plan
is
operational
limits.
R
So
by
reducing
duty
cycle
not
having
overlapping
activities,
we
propose
to
limit
the
impact.
The
neighbors,
in
addition
to
those
proposed
mitigation
strategies,
we've
already,
we've
already
incorporated
mitigation
strategies
into
the
current
construction
work,
we're
doing
we've
located
our
construction
hoist
and
our
loading
dock
on
the
Front
Street
side,
which
is
away
from
all
the
neighboring
buildings.
We've
located
our
concrete
pumping
operation
within
the
building
to
further
contain
sound,
so
I'm
here
today.
R
R
The
duration
of
the
work
or
the
type
we
are
completing,
if
required,
we'd,
be
open
to
doing
this
on
a
trial
basis
with
noise
levels
monitored
by
a
third-party
agency,
and
if
there
was
noise
levels
being
generated
are
not
acceptable.
We
would
stop
the
work
and
reevaluate
the
requests
we
are
open
to
having
a
noise
monitoring
conducted
by
the
city
is
outlined
by
the
bylaw.
R
R
A
A
K
A
P
A
B
You
and
I
have
a
motion
to
defer
this
indefinitely
to
allow
the
applicant
time
to
work
with
the
neighbourhood.
Just
some
history-
and
it
was
alluded
to
my
office-
was
informed
of
this
request.
Initially,
we
suggested
that
conversations
take
place
with
the
neighborhood,
specifically
the
Draper
Street
residents
Association
and
the
wellington
place
Neighborhood
Association.
Those
conversations
didn't
take
place.
An
application
was
put
in,
we
denied
it
now
an
appeal
has
come
in.
We
have
suggested
to
the
applicant
to
work
with
the
community
to
do
that
necessary
outreach
and
the
motion
here
to
defer
indefinitely.
B
We
will
bring
it
back
when
that
work
has
taken
place.
This
is
a
large
site.
It's
got
seven
buildings,
it's
a
enormous,
mixed-use
site.
An
incredibly
collaborative
process
is
done
to
approve
the
reason
I
would
suggest.
A
similar
type
of
collaborative
process
should
be
done
if
they're
gonna
be
changes
to
construction.
Thank
you
thank.
A
You
questions
of
the
mover
anyone
else
to
speak
on
the
item,
seeing
none
on
the
motion
to
defer
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried.
That
brings
us
to
te
thirteen
point.
Two
seven
Metrolinx
ontario
line,
right-of-way
permit
processes
and
requirements.
Are
there
any
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
make
a
deputation
on
this
side
I'm,
seeing
none
questions
of
staff
counselor
long
Tam?
Yes,.
D
I
want
to
understand
this
and
thank
you
snot
for
that
for
the
for
the
report
and
it's
a
little
light.
It's
it's
four
pages
but
I
think
it's
going
to
have
big
impact
in
the
local
community.
So
I
just
want
to
understand
this
better.
So
with
respect
to
the
24
hour
overnight
construction,
it
seems
to
me
that
if,
if
Metrolinx
is,
is
asking
for
that
24
hour
construction,
the
only
thing
they
have
to
do
is
provide
three
days
of
working
notice
in
advance
of
that
work
and
they
get
that
permit.
Is
that
correct.
M
Through
the
chair
councilman
long
time,
thank
you
for
the
question.
I'll
introduce
myself
as
Navi
Tucker
manager
of
transit
infrastructure
projects,
unit
and
transportation
services.
Our
unit
introduced,
basically,
the
issues
permits
for
all
the
construction
related
activities
associated
with
Metrolinx
projects.
So
likewise,
we
issue
permits
for
the
Ontario
Line
as
well.
For
your
question.
D
M
Is
not
the
only
condition
we
can
impose
any
kind
on
the
on
the
contractor?
Any
communication
needs
that
are
that
are
that
we
foresee
that
they
need
to
follow.
We
can
always
include
that
as
a
permit
condition.
So
if
we
need
to
extend
this
notification
to
let's
say
five
days
or
even
two
weeks,
we
can
do
that.
Can.
M
D
So
because
the
Ontario
line
route
alignment
technology
station
placements
are
not
fully
defined,
we
we
don't
have
any
final
plans
before
us,
but
we
do
know
that
portions
of
it
will
be
above
ground
and
portions
will
be
below
ground.
The
adjacencies
to
neighborhoods
will
have
varying
meter
distances
for
the
for
the
areas
that
are
going
to
be
above
ground,
and
there
are
going
to
be
some
that's
already
been
then
stated
by
the
province.
D
What
would
be
the
mitigation
efforts
that
you
and
and
and
the
city
staff
and
your
division
would
undertake
to
protect
the
residents
in
the
area,
so
they
have
access
to
some
adequate
sleep,
also
recognizing
that
people
work
shift,
so
there
might
be
hospital
workers
or
those
who
work
in
other
type
of
those
industries,
like
what
other
measures
are
you
taking
to
protect
them?
Thank.
M
You
for
the
question
counsel
want
and
through
the
chair
we
like,
we
have
doing,
we
have
been
doing
on
the
LRT
projects
or
on-the-go
expansion
projects.
We
have
been
asking
metro
links
and
their
contractors
to
undertake
any
noisy
work
before
11
o'clock
that
includes
drilling
excavation.
You
know
any
any
truck
hauling
that
is
done
before
11
p.m.
so
we've
been
asking
them,
and
also
to
put
in
any
additional
mitigate
noise
mitigation
measures
into
place
to
reduce
the
noise
impact
on
the
noise
sensitive
buildings.
Well,.
D
There'd
be
compensation
for
businesses
affected,
or
perhaps
accommodation
arrangements
made
for
tenants,
who's,
just
simply
a
residence.
We
can't
simply
not
stay
in
their
homes
like
is
that
going
to
be
one
of
the
requirements
for
the
for
the
for
the
business
operators
along
the
route,
as
well
as
for
the
residents
through.
M
The
chair
to
counsel
long
time,
I
can
attest
from
my
experience
on
the
LRT
projects.
Metrolinx
did
have
these
discussions
with
the
businesses
along
Eglinton
Avenue,
which
were
affected
because
of
the
construction.
Similar
discussions
can
be
made
on
this
project,
but
I
can't
speak
on
behalf
of
Metrolinx,
but
we
can
definitely
have
these
type
of
discussions
with
them
that
if
these
these
measures
can
be
put
in
place
on
this
project
as
well
and.
D
D
A
D
And
I
apologizing
to
that
councillor
Fletcher's,
not
here,
because
she's,
actually
the
one
who
took
the
leadership
to
to
to
bring
this
report
forward
and
work
with
staff
to
make
sure
that
this
information
is
available
to
us
and
I.
Think
rightfully
so.
She's
she's
advocating
very
hard
on
behalf
of
her
residents.
Just
as
I
know,
other
affected
councillors
such
as
councillor
Krusty
and
myself,
are
also
doing
the
same
thing.
D
The
impact
and
the
way
the
sound
vibrates
and
moves
around
is
just
devastating
for
those
communities
and
and
and
people
with
mental
health.
There
their
state
of
mind
their
their
overall
physical
health
has
deteriorated,
and
it
has
been
a
constant
battle
when
I
think
about
the
the
the
st.
Clair
or
the
Eglinton
LRT
and
the
construction
there.
D
It
has
been
very,
very
difficult
for
the
resins
for
the
local
councillors
for
staff
to
try
to
number
one
recognize
that
it
is
a
city
building,
project
and
construction
is
needing
to
take
place
and
noise
and
construction
impact
will
happen.
But
I
don't
think
the
city
has
done
a
very
good
job,
necessarily
and
and
Metrolinx
is,
is
part
of
that
conversation
because
that's
their
project
along
Eglinton,
but
I
don't
think
that
we've
done
necessarily
a
good
job
of
defending
the
rights
of
the
residents
and
as
well
as
trying
to
take
into
consideration.
D
You
know
the
harmful
impact
that
this
could
have
for
business
operators.
We
already
know
that
retailers
are
under
a
tremendous
tremendous
pressure.
It's
not
just
the
onslaught
of
online
shopping,
but
overall
districts
in
Toronto
and
neighborhoods
are
struggling
and,
and
that
could
be
through
impact
evaluations
that
are
surging,
unpredictable
tax
increases,
and
then
you
throw
in
a
multi-year
project
right
across
their
door.
Where
you,
where
there's
signage
and
they're
their
storefronts,
are
blocked
and
when
people
are
going
to
used
to
go
elsewhere,
many
dis
businesses
simply
will
not
survive.
D
So
my
concern
here
is
that
if
we
can
do
better,
I
recognize
that
this
may
be
may
not
be
the
mechanism
to
do
that
work.
This
may
not
be
the
policy
outcome
that
we
need,
because
it's
just
a
report,
it
doesn't
recommend
any
enhancements
or
further
strengthening,
but
I
do
think
that
we
need
to
think
through.
How
do
we
ensure
that
residents
who
are
going
to
be
living
with
a
24-hour
construction,
as
well
as
business
owners
who
are
currently
struggling?
D
How
do
we
ensure
that
they
are
actually
able
able
to
withstand
and
survive
this
critical
infrastructure
project,
so
they
can
see
the
light
at
the
end
of
the
day?
Ten
years,
fifteen
years
later
and
say,
we've
survived
the
construction
we've
lived
through
it,
their
children
would
have
aged
out
of
school
and
probably
heading
to
university,
and
they
were
able
to
do
their
homework
in
peace
and
at
least
get
a
good
night's
sleep,
including
those
who
work
shift.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
You
anyone
else
to
speak
on
the
other
okay,
so
why
I
believe
the
recommendation
is
to
receive
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carry
members
that
takes
us
to
the
end
of
our
scheduled
business
before
we
do
the
bills.
I
want
to
thank
karlie
who's,
filling
in
for
Ellen.
Today,
karlie
normally
administers
the
Scarborough
Community
Council.
It
had
been
my
hope
that
we
would
have
a
good
rousing
200
item
agenda
for
her,
but
she
seems
to
have
brought
the
workload
it's
typical
of
Scarborough
with
her
and
also
Margaret.
A
A
Eighty
one
eight
two,
two
one,
eight
four
one,
eight
six,
two
one,
eight
eight
one:
nine
one
and
one
nine
three,
two
one:
nine
four
prepared
for
the
February
5th
2020
meeting
13
of
the
community
council,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
carried
and
I
also
move
that
the
Toronto
East
York
Community
Council,
pass
and
declare
as
a
bylaw
confirmatory
bill,
to
confirm
the
legislative
proceedings
of
the
Toronto
East
York
Community
Council,
acting
under
delegated
authority
at
meeting
13,
On,
February
5th
2020.
All
those
in
favor
opposed
carry
have
a
wonderful
afternoon.