►
Description
Toronto and East York Community Council, meeting 11, December 3, 2019 - Part 2 of 2
Agenda and background materials:
http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/decisionBodyProfile.do?function=doPrepare&meetingId=15449
Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPIXZkvby-4
Meeting Navigation:
0:09:58 - Meeting resume
3:19:25 - Meeting resume
A
Members
before
we
return
to
the
agenda,
I
just
want
to
draw
your
attention
during
just
during
the
lunch
break,
you
were
circulated
a
new
version
of
the
attachment
one
on
item
44,
that's
the
list
of
streets
that
we're
considering
for
the
speed
reduction.
So
if
you
could
just
take
a
look
at
that
before
we
get
to
that
item,
okay,.
A
B
Thank
you,
I
have
to
change
my
notes.
It
said
good
morning
it's
good
afternoon
now.
My
name
is
bill.
Brick
and
I'm
very
pleased
to
address
Toronto
in
East
York
Community
Council
today,
representing
Habitat
for
Humanity
GTA
as
their
senior
advisor
real
estate,
I
joined
Habitat
for
Humanity
GTA
in
an
advisory
role
in
early
2019
after
five
years
with
build
Toronto
and
create
teo.
During
that
time,
I
gained
a
deep
understanding
of
the
great
work
that
habitat
does
to
develop
and
promote
the
cause
for
more
affordable
housing
in
our
city.
B
Toronto
City
Council
is
to
be
commended
for
its
support
for
increased,
affordable
housing
and,
in
particular,
the
housing
now
program
currently
being
rolled
out
in
the
last
five
years.
The
median
income
in
Toronto
has
increased
four
percent
beyond
inflation,
while
housing
costs
have
increased
by
94
percent
beyond
inflation.
In
the
same
time,
only
two
percent
of
the
housing
built
in
Toronto
has
been
considered.
Affordable.
Therefore,
increasing
the
affordable
housing
stock
in
the
City
of
Toronto
is
a
priority
for
all
of
us.
B
It
is
with
great
pleasure
that
I'm
here
today
to
speak
in
support
of
te
eleven
point:
five,
which
includes
the
launch
of
an
historic
1117
million
dollar,
affordable
housing,
trust
funded
by
local
developers
to
promote
the
creation
of
new,
affordable
housing
for
Toronto
residents.
This
affordable
housing
trust
is
the
unique
collaboration
between
the
city
of
Toronto
capital
developments.
Metropia,
the
local
community
group
build
a
better
bluer
dufferin
Habitat
for
Humanity
and
st.
Clair's
multi-faith
homes.
B
This
seventeen
million
dollar,
affordable
trust,
will
help
create
more
affordable
living
opportunities
for
residents
across
Toronto,
starting
with
the
blur
Dufferin
neighbourhood
of
the
seventeen
million
dollars,
nine
million
will
be
delivered
as
a
cash
contribution
by
capital
developments
and
Metropia,
and
the
remaining
8
million
will
be
available
through
a
ten
year.
Interest-Free
loan
provided
by
those
same
developers,
this
nonprofit,
affordable
housing
trust,
can
now
be
used
to
finance.
We
estimate
up
to
a
hundred
and
eighty
new
affordable
units
in
the
city.
B
The
governing
documentation
to
establish
the
trust
is
now
underway,
and
an
independent
board
of
trustees
will
be
selected
to
provide
governance,
support
and
a
structure
that
ensures
that
the
trust
accomplishes
the
goals
as
set
out
in
the
report.
I'm
also
pleased
to
introduce
and
acknowledge
Joshua
Bernard
Joshua
back
there,
vice-president
real
estate
at
Habitat
for
Humanity
GTA,
who
also
worked
tirelessly
on
this
initiative.
B
This
is
a
real
win
for
affordable
housing
in
Toronto,
and
we
at
Habitat
GTA
were
pleased
to
work
together
with
the
city,
the
developers
and
the
community,
to
create
this
unique
vehicle
to
deliver
more
affordable
housing.
However,
the
real
thank
you
must
go
to
the
blurr
Dufferin
community
and
to
councillor
by
law
for
insisting
that
more
be
done
as
a
result
of
this
development
and
to
the
developers
for
stepping
up
and
going
out-of-the-box
to
come
to
this
agreement.
B
Affordable
housing
in
Toronto
needs
more
innovative
solutions
to
this
real
problem.
This
affordable
housing
trust
is
a
new
idea
that
will
have
an
impact
for
years
to
come.
I.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
to
the
community
council
today
and
I'm
happy
to
be
back
once
again
speaking
in
front
of
you
on
this
very
happy
motion.
Thank
you.
Nice.
C
You
bill
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
that
this
can
actually
be
the
beginning
of
something
so,
for
example,
other
deals
that
happen
in
the
neighborhood
could
be
directing
other
funds
in
there
we
could.
Actually.
This
could
actually
be
the
beginning
of
the
trust
and
the
opportunities
are
endless.
Yes,.
B
I
think
counsel:
are
you
more
than
most
understand
that
we
need
many
forms
of
affordable
housing
in
the
city?
Not
just
affordable
ownership,
that's
been
a
habitat,
but
we
need.
We
need
a
significant
increase
in
affordable
rental
which
which
the
other
partner-
and
this
could
become
a
living
breathing
entity
that
other
funds
are
put
into.
I
just
spoke
with
councillor
Matt
Lowe
a
few
minutes
ago,
but
the
need
for
long-term
care,
affordable
housing
in
the
city
really
needed.
B
C
The
other
opportunity
that
we
have
with
these
funds
is
that
it
allows
habitats
and
Clair's
and
the
organizations
involved
to
leverage
their
ask
their
existing
assets
and
leverage
other
funds
that
other
orders
of
government
might
have
available
through
the
National,
Housing
Strategy
and
so
on,
because
I
think
that,
as
we
struct
a
deal,
that
was
something
that
was
always
very
president.
In
our
mind
is
how
do
we,
leverage
everybody's
assets
and
contributions?
Is
that
correct,
yeah.
B
As
you're
well
aware,
this
17
million
is
is
enough
to
to
start,
but
you
need
all
the
level
of
government
assistance
that
we
can
get
and
you
need
other
fundraising
or
whatever
the
unique
thing
about
this
is
it
provides
a
bit
of
a
walking
around
fund
because
so
many
times
we
see
pieces
of
land
that
come
up
and
people
say
that
would
be
a
great
place
to
do
a
development
that
includes
affordable
housing.
But
but
people
say
we
have
to
fundraise.
B
D
What
has
come
about,
but
but
more
as
Arella
was
saying
about
the
the
process
to
get
to
where
we
are
now
not
having
I
didn't
have
any
prior
knowledge
being
an
engineer
of
the
way
that
city
and
city
planning
works
and
the
processes
work
until
I
joined.
This
group
build
a
better
bluer,
Dufferin,
very
dedicated
community
people,
volunteers
and
but
what
I've
seen
now.
It
says
quite
clearly
to
me
that
too
little
is
being
done
through
the
city
to
get
tax
payers,
their
fair
share
of
the
value
that
high-density
creates
for
developers.
D
Now,
however,
over
three
years
prior
to
that,
the
behest
of
the
city
councilor,
variations
of
the
group
had
been
collecting
neighborhood
community
input
on
community
desired
benefits
which
are
definitely
similar
to
the
city's
priorities
and
that
should
be
incorporated
into
what
at
the
time
was
school
public
property.
I
about
the
time
that
I
joined
the
the
community
had
formed
this
well-organized
volunteer
group
to
inform
the
city
of
issues
of
importance
and
keep
the
community
apprised
of
the
progress
of
the
development
plan
in
the
steering
committee.
D
We
are
fortunate
to
have
people
with
expertise
in
many
areas
that
helped
keep
us
in
touch
with
the
community
and
the
city.
Other
volunteer
Drew's
won't
have
so
much
relevant
experience
I
over
the
course
of
the
next
couple
of
years.
We
did
a
lot
keep
in
mind
that
most
of
the
committee
have
full-time
jobs,
I'm
one
of
the
few
retirees
we
had
meetings
monthly.
Then
it
became
bimonthly
and
eventually
weekly.
D
We
can't
became
incorporated
so
that
we
could
be
a
party
at
the
ALP
at
we
tell
community
forums,
to
discuss
the
community
with
the
community,
their
needs
and
prepared
newsletters
and
a
website
to
provide
info
input.
We
attended
street
fairs,
prepared
signs
and
buttons
and
met
with
the
city
as
often
as
they
would
have
reached
meet.
Needless
to
say,
we
had
to
hold
fundraisers
and
request
donations
to
keep
all
this
going.
D
D
We
do
support
the
development,
especially
as
it
has
ended
out
with
the
Land
Trust,
but
it's
clear
to
me
now,
then,
in
order
to
meet
their
own
targets
and
satisfying
community's
needs
for
services
and
health
and
well-being
benefits.
The
city
must
have
preset
tools
and
processes
to
ensure
that
the
many
density
developments
already
in
the
pipe
include
these
benefits
and
they
aren't
there
yet.
A
F
Thank
you,
so
I'm
not
here
in
any
way
to
express
anything
negative
about
this
development.
In
fact,
I'm
here
to
celebrate
the
good
work
that
was
done
here
that
brought
significant
contributions.
That
I
think
are
really
strongly
welcomed
by
the
city
by
the
community
and
by
Councillor
by
Lao.
The
other
reason
I'm
here
is
to
hopefully
help
us
have
more
celebrations
like
that
in
the
future.
There
are
things
of
this
process
and
this
development
underscore
that
can
help
us
do
well
and
gain
better
community
benefits
more
consistently
in
the
future.
F
One
is
that,
in
addition
to
the
good
work
of
the
city
and
the
staff
and
the
local
councillor,
the
community
brought
some
very
valuable
roles
to
the
process,
but
it
really
wasn't
easy.
This
was
an
unusually
capacious
group.
There
was
a
lawyer
in
the
neighbourhood
who
helped
navigate
the
legal
niceties.
There
were
housing
experts
in
the
community
who
helped
decode
the
intricacies
of
community
benefits.
There
was
actually
a
bona
fides
ock
star
who
joined
the
group
and
held
a
concert
to
help
us
all
raise
money.
F
People
had
the
flexibility
put
in
long
hours
as
Lynn
mentioned
and
and
to
help
make
that
happen
and
helping
good
things
like
this
happen
shouldn't
require
such
an
exceptional
circumstance.
It
would
be
great
if
we
could
figure
out
a
way
to
systematically
support
processes
like
this,
so
we
don't
have
to
have
planners
and
rockstars,
and
lawyers
and
university
professors
in
every
community
group
to
be
able
to
produce
an
outcome
that
was
as
robust
and
useful
as
this
one
was.
F
The
second
thing
I
want
to
mention
is
that
this
I
think
gives
us
a
really
useful
local
case
study.
Something
good
happened
here
in
Ward
9,
there
were
valuable
contributions
made
to
affordable
housing
as
a
result
of
this
process,
and
we've
always
known
in
theory
that
that
was
something
that
we
could
do
citywide
a
theoretical
level.
We
have
all
the
studies.
We
need
to
remind
us
that
there
is
sufficient
profit
in
the
development
industry
to
be
contributing
a
lot
more
to
community
benefits
than
right
now.
F
The
final
report
on
section
37
review
in
2014
showed
us
that
we're
getting
about
ten
to
twenty
to
forty
percent
of
the
value
of
increased
density,
whereas
Vancouver
gets
seventy.
The
inclusionary
zoning
study
that
NBL
ceded
last
year
show
us
that
we
could
get
about
thirty
percent
of
the
units
for
affordable
housing
in
some
neighborhoods
and
still
have
a
development
industry.
That's
profitable.
F
There
is
money
on
the
table
and
if
we
wondered
about
whether
or
not
that
played
out
on
the
ground,
this
is
a
great
example
because
in
a
process
parallel
to
the
normal
work
that
we
do
on
this,
there
was
another
seventeen
million
dollars
for
a
land,
trust
that
was
able
to
be
brought
to
bear,
showing
again
that
there
is
capacity
there
that
we
can
grow
up.
So,
let's
make
the
most
something
fantastic.
That
happened
here.
Let's
learn
lessons
from
this
and
spread
them
to
more
neighborhoods.
F
Let's
make
sure
that
we're
asking
council
on
asking
the
new
housing
plan
to
find
ways
to
get
more
of
the
value
of
development
into
communities,
because,
as
Lynn
mentioned,
and
as
we
saw
from
all
those
studies,
that
capacity
is
there.
The
space
in
terms
of
the
economics
is
there,
and
we
should
be
achieving
that
and
let's
make
sure
that
we're
supporting
communities
to
do
their
vessels
to
be
a
good
partner
to
the
city
in
achieving
the
city's
goals
in
creating
affordable
housing
in
creating
equity,
creating
access
all
the
processes.
Thank
you.
Thank.
G
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
today.
I
do
not
object
and
proposed
settlement.
I
do,
however,
want
to
share
my
reflections
of
the
process.
This
led
to
the
settlement
I'm,
sharing
these
thoughts
with
the
goal
of
improving
future
developments,
future
public
consultation
processes,
I,
am
a
member
of
build
a
better
bluer
Duffy,
a
residential
led
community
group
that,
for
the
past
two
years,
has
advocated
for
significant,
affordable
housing
and
community
space
as
part
of
the
redevelopment
of
the
public
school
lands
at
floor
and
government.
G
As
one
of
the
co-chairs
of
the
group
I
have
all
the
planning
process
for
the
site
very
closely
participating
in
whatever
it
possible,
unfortunately
has
been
a
very
frustrating
process,
one
that
I
think
could
be
very
much
improved.
I
first
became
involved
in
advocating
for
community
benefits
on
the
site
after
a
meeting
hosted
by
City,
Planning
and
early
2017.
G
Nothing
briefly
paint
a
picture
of
that
meeting
for
you.
It
was
hosted
on
the
site
at
blue
collegiate
in
the
cafeteria,
a
very
large
room,
though
it
was
a
cold
winter
night
week
night
the
place
was
packed
with
residents,
all
of
whom
were
eager
to
hear,
discuss
the
developers
plans
for
this
landmark
site.
G
There
was
energy
and
excited
chatter,
I
believe
for
some
there
was
even
hopeful
anticipation,
as
we've
been
told
that
the
trade-off
for
the
loss
of
these
public
lands
be
a
large
new
community
hub
that
would
he
post
house,
community
services,
arts
companies
and
other
valued
nonprofits.
There
were
tenants,
homeowners,
small
business
owners,
parents,
artists
all
had
come
to
contribute
positively,
dedicating
their
time
to
ensure
that
this
massive
development
would
be
a
positive
one
for
the
neighborhood
and
for
our
city.
G
Key
shared
concerns,
I
would
learn
later,
were
affordable
housing
park,
space
community
hub
space
and
trans.
Sadly,
the
mood
by
the
end
of
that
consultation
was
frustrated
and
angry.
The
presentation
implants
missed
the
mark
of
residents
concerns
altogether.
The
speakers
were
tightly
managed
and
there
was
no
time
allotted
for
public
dialogue
or
feedback.
Community
members
were
told
to
write
notes
in
small
groups
to
submit
to
City
Planning.
We
weren't
told
when
we
would
get
to
read
each
other's
notes
or
engage
in
any
meaningful
public
exchange
from
that
time
on
members
of
what
would
become
build.
G
A
better
lure
Dufferin
were
given
to
share
our
viewpoints
with
the
city
as
I
understood
that
even
the
access
we
had
is
rare
for
a
community
group,
but
sadly,
even
so,
the
process
to
wrote
has
echoed
that
first
meeting
I
just
described
for
you
it's
about
a
shirt
despite
assurances
that
we
would
have
an
opportunity
for
me
to
meaningfully
contribute
at
a
seam
to
rope
that
we
were
missing.
Important
information
not
invited
to
critical
conversations.
G
Perhaps,
ultimately,
we've
been
consulted
too
late
at
a
point
in
the
process
when
things
could
not
be
significantly
Rhian
vision
and
we're
nonprofit
expertise
could
not
be
liverish
leveraged,
I'm
hopeful.
We
can
find
a
more
transparent
and
accountable
planning
process
and
urge
the
city
to
do
better.
At
this.
The
committee
benefits
that
our
neighborhood
group
managed
to
secure
outside
of
city
prose
processes,
and
that's
an
emphasis
outside
of
the
city
process
have
shown
the
value
of
community
LED
input
and
volunteer
efforts.
G
G
Number
three
engage
the
public
before
it
is
too
late
to
change
course:
number
four,
proactively:
support
and
strategize
of
local
residents
groups
and
nonprofits
about
development
opportunities,
especially
when
the
residents
and
nonprofits
value
align
with
city
goals,
for
instance,
more
affordable
housing,
green
space,
etc.
Thank
you
in
closing.
I
just
wanted
to
pass
on
a
comment
that
I
shared
that
I
heard
from
one
of
my
community
colleagues
I'm
an
artist
and
artists
contribute
and
make
our
communities
vibrant.
G
F
A
E
Thank
you
very
much
for
having
me
speak
and
like
many
of
my
neighbors
I'm
here
to
speak
to
you
about
the
seven
acre
plot
of
public
land
sold
by
the
TDSB
for
private
redevelopment
in
2016
and,
like
my
neighbors
I'm,
not
here
today,
to
ask
you
to
vote
against
the
recommendations
of
the
staff
report
before
you.
Instead
of
here
to
ask
you
to
apply
the
lessons
from
the
site
to
the
development
in
our
city.
I'm
co-chair
of
build
a
better
who
are
different.
E
A
volunteer
resident
led
group
advocating
for
equitable
and
inclusive
development
in
the
Florida
for
neighborhood.
For
the
past
two
years,
bbbb
has
advocated
for
significant
community
developments
from
this
redevelopment,
our
community
called
for
20%,
affordable
housing,
a
seventy
thousand
square
foot
hub
a
large
public
park
and
a
rebuilt
laura
collegiate,
with
the
same
amenity
as
the
current
school
and
large
enough
to
meet
the
needs
of
the
growing
neighborhood.
E
We're
proud
of
our
role
in
helping
to
secure
the
17
million
dollar
nonprofit
land
trust
launched
this
week
by
Habitat
for
Humanity,
with
funding
from
the
developers
of
this
site
I'm.
Also
in
a
new
old
word
coined
a
couple
of
weeks
ago,
with
the
national
housing
day
celebrations
a
proud
hauser
I've,
been
an
activist,
frontline
worker
researcher
and
an
advocate
on
issues
of
housing,
homelessness
and
Human
Rights
for
over
30
years.
Today,
I
want
to
put
some
of
what
I've
learned
as
a
resident
activist
into
the
context
of
my
professional
expertise.
E
Today,
the
housing
Secretariat
has
announced
its
new
10-year
housing
plan
for
Toronto
and,
what's
really
exciting,
is
that
this
plan
is
based
in
Human
Rights,
with
the
leadership
of
our
deputy
mayor,
the
plans
anchored
by
new
housing
charter
that
recognizes
housing
is
fundamental
to
human
rights
and
dignity,
and
that
outlines
the
city's
obligations
to
uphold
the
human
right
to
adequate
housing.
This
is
a
historic
accomplishment
that
gives
us
an
opportunity
to
do
development
better
in
the
City
of
Toronto.
E
Let's
consider
what
the
city's
duties
are
under
this
new
Charter
and
how
the
Bloor
deference
story
would
be
different
if
it
unfolded
in
the
context
of
a
rights-based
approach
to
development.
First,
the
Charter
charges
the
city
with
the
duty
to
progressively
realize
the
right
of
every
Torontonian
to
home.
That
is
safe,
secure,
healthy,
dignified,
affordable
and
accessible.
E
The
concept
of
progressive
realisation
means
that,
through
its
policy
decisions,
including
planning
decisions,
the
city
must
show
that
it's
moving
in
the
right
direction
continuously
improving
the
housing
situation
in
Toronto,
with
priority
given
to
those
who
are
most
vulnerable
policy.
Decisions
must
apply
rights
based
tyria,
putting
people's
human
right
to
adequate
housing
at
the
center.
E
Secondly,
a
rights-based
approach
to
housing
requires
the
city
to
dedicate
the
maximum
available
resources
to
the
realization
of
the
right
to
housing.
This
includes
funds,
but
also
land
and
the
judicious
use
of
city
resources
for
maximum
impact.
In
the
case
of
this
site,
we
saw
seven
acres
of
public
land
sold
to
the
highest
bidder
by
Toronto
lands
corporation.
Instead
of
preserving
this
site
to
meet
a
vital
social
need
in
the
Stafford
purple.
For
you,
we
see
that
a
56
unit
building
will
be
transferred
to
the
city.
E
E
H
E
E
H
E
E
A
D
I
won't
take
the
full
five
minutes.
Mr.
chairman
I'm,
really
just
here
for
a
couple
of
things.
Just
don't
don't
know
how
many
of
you
have
had
a
chance
to
go
through
the
staff
report.
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
capital
developments
and
Metropia
and
I
have
representatives
of
my
clients
with
with
me
here
today.
We're
very
pleased
to
be
here.
It's
been
a
long
process.
It's
been
over
three
years
working
together
with
city
staff,
members
of
the
community,
our
new
partners
at
Habitat
for
Humanity
under
the
the
wise
guidance
of
the
deputy
mayor.
D
This
project
is
clearly
going
to
transfer
transform
this
intersection
that
Bloor
and
Doran.
You
can
see
in
this
particularly
great
site
plan
detail
up
here.
There
are
a
total
of
six
buildings
proposed.
They
range
in
height
from
eight
to
thirty
seven
stories.
There's
a
significant
retail
and
office
component
proposed
as
well.
D
The
Kent
School
that
has
been
referenced
by
a
couple
of
the
deputies
right
now
is
being
conserved
and
designated
under
the
Heritage
Act
as
part
of
this
process,
and
the
first
two
floors
of
that
building
are
be
converted
to
a
new
community
hub
for
the
area
and
included
within
that
there's.
A
rendering
here,
which
shows
the
the
outdoor
play
space
associated
with
the
daycare
center,
which
is
being
incorporated
into
the
building
as
well.
I
have
a
couple
renderings
that
I
can
show
you,
which
include
what
you're
looking
at
there
is.
D
The
the
new
publicly
accessible
private
street
there's,
also
a
public
street
being
incorporated
and
a
large
new
public
park
as
well
being
included
in
the
project.
The
project
incorporates
a
direct
underground
connection
to
the
TTC
station
on
the
Noir
side
of
the
street.
There
is
no
weather
protected
connection
available
right
now
for
pedestrians
and
that's
something
else
being
provided.
We've
heard
a
lot
about
the
the
Land
Trust,
the
affordable
housing
trust
which
has
been
set
up
with
Habitat
for
Humanity.
It's
a
it's
an
unprecedented
contribution.
D
Coming
from
my
my
two
clients
in
in
this
case
and
I,
think
we're
all
as
a
team
very
proud
of
the
project
that
were
here
seeking
approval
for
so
I
I
wanted
to
just
end
by
by
thanking
city
staff.
We
have
worked
with
a
variety
of
staff
in
different
departments
over
the
the
last
couple
years
and,
in
particular,
I
wanted
to
give
a
special
shout
out
to
Willie
McCray
and
Kirk
Hatcher,
who
have
worked
tirelessly
on
bringing
forward
this
very
lengthy
report,
with
probably
the
longest
set
of
recommendations.
D
I've
ever
seen
a
staff
report
and
my
client
is
here
indicating
they're
satisfied
with
those
recommendations
and
are
commending
them
to
you.
With
with
a
motion
which
I
know
the
deputy
mayor
is
bringing
forward
and
again,
I
would
also
just
like
to
thank
councilor
by
Lao.
Her.
Her
commitment
to
this
ward
into
affordable
housing
in
particular,
has
been
very
evident
throughout
this
process,
and
it's
led
to
a
better
project
thanks.
D
A
C
I
The
chair,
yes,
we
lived
through
a
few
years
of
those
conversations
we
did
ask
for
inclusion
of
coral
housing
and
the
provision
of
community
space
through
trial
has
incorporate.
They
did
not
provide
a
response
to
that,
although
through
the
province,
there
was
a
contribution
towards
the
community
space
as
part
of
the
the
land
deal
so.
C
If
I
recall
correctly,
there
were
seven
million
dollars
to
build
30,000
square
feet,
that's
correct
in
using
construction
costs.
Today,
the
seven
million
dollar
builds
your
30,000
square
feet.
No,
it
does
not.
There's
not
did
the
Toronto
Lands
corporation
actually
put
in
their
purchase
and
sale
that
the
rest
would
be
made
up
from
section
37
from
the
city.
No.
I
L
L
C
C
C
C
C
G
C
G
H
Want
to
clarify
that
the
section
37
and
what
the
school
boards
requirement
was
in
their
sale
and
given
the
length
of
time
between
selling
it
and
building
something.
Did
they
not
anticipate
the
cost
would
rise?
Did
they
not
make
accommodation
for
that
and
they
actually
put
in
their
purchase
of
sale
that
it
would
be
covered
by
somebody
else?
I'm
quite
shocked
by
that
and
I'd
like
to
hear
more.
F
L
D
H
H
I
This
is
the
so
in
the
earlier
conversations
before
that
the
developer
came
into
the
picture.
We
did
work
with
the
hub
Secretariat
your
correct
reporting
directly
to
the
premier.
At
the
time.
Pardon
me
and
I
know
it's
very
hard
to
hear
you.
Sorry,
sorry,
the
hub
Secretariat
did
report
directly
to
the
premier,
the
premier
at
the
time.
I
H
I
H
I
understand
but
I'm,
just
going
like
this
school
provincial
hub,
Secretariat
premier
establish
a
hub
negotiated
a
hub
and
they're,
not
paying
the
full
cost.
Do
I
have
that
right.
That
is
correct,
and
it's
in
the
RFP
that
there
has
to
be
a
hub
because
there's
a
hub
Secretariat
and
then
they
didn't
fully
fulfill
their
financial
obligations
for
this
hub.
That's.
I
H
H
Don't
think
it's
public
and
those
dollars,
you
might
know,
regulation
for
four,
four
or
whatever
the
new
number
is.
Somebody
might
know
that.
Do
those
dollars
go
to
the
province
and
then
back
to
the
school
board,
are
they
directly
to
the
Lance
Corporation?
Do
they
have
an
obligation
to
the
province
with
the
sale
of
property.
I
C
C
It
was
probably
about
11
years
I
wasn't
even
elected
I
was
I,
live
in
the
neighborhood,
so
I
was
starting
to
go
to
those
communities
meetings
at
that
time
and
it
was
about
school
closures,
and
so
we've
gone
through
all
those
processes
of
closing
schools
and
relocating
kids,
and
then
it
came
to
what
to
do
with
a
site,
and
there
were
there
was
lots
of
ideas
what
to
do
with
the
site.
Actually,
the
city
do
did
put
in
a
letter
of
intent
with
the
Catholic
school
board,
because
we
were
interested
to
jointly
by
the
site.
C
It
was
not
approved
by
the
Ministry
of
Education.
At
the
time
we
put
in
the
request,
we
said
we
wanted
to
keep
this
as
public
land,
and
we
were
basically
the
door
was
shut
in
our
face
and
say,
go
off
to
this
working
group
with
the
hub
Secretariat,
which
the
city
staff
and
myself
spent
a
lot
of
hours
a
lot
of
time,
and
at
that
table
constantly,
we
asked:
please
don't
put
up
this
site
for
sale
without
any
conditions.
C
Make
sure
that
this
is
a
city
building
exercise
when
you
go
out
to
the
market
that
there
is
affordable
housing
housing
requirement
that
there
is
the
hub
requirement
that
these
requires
are
incorporated
in
the
way
that
you
sell
the
site.
Well,
this
the
site
was
put
up
for
sale
with
the
7
million
dollar
contribution
from
the
province
for
a
hub
and
for
the
last
three
years.
C
C
Three
years
ago,
planning
did
go
out
to
to
the
community
with
a
developer
and
we
were
bringing
together
a
working
group
and
the
community
basically
asked
us
to
slow
down
and
because
they
really
wanted
to
organize
and
that's
how
build
a
better
blurr
deal
was
kind
of
formed
with
people
in
the
community.
And
since
then
we
have
been
working
on
with,
with
planning
and
later
on.
In
the
process,
we
actually
brought
habitat
and
st.
Clair's
to
the
table
to
help
us
really
put
together
the
affordable
housing
component,
which
was
something
really
really
important
for
everybody.
C
Was
it
frustrating?
Yes,
it
was
frustrating,
it
was
frustrating
because
as
much
as
we
say
here
that
you
know
this
is
Toronto
TDSB
land
and
we
are
the
city
and
we
really
you
know
we
have
to
look
at
this.
As
you
know,
private
land,
which
is
now
owned
by
a
developer.
It
is
hard
when
the
community
looks
at
it
and
sees
public
schools
in
there
where
they
went
to
school,
where
they
played
soccer,
where
they
they
have
their
Park
and
to
tell
them
that
is
not
public
land.
I
understand
the
frustration.
C
C
I
said
I
understand,
but
those
condition
that
time
has
passed
and
then
we
started
focused
really
focusing
on
this
idea
of
the
the
hub
and
the
and
the
affordable
housing
and
strikes
turning
to
narrowing
our
priorities
and
I
think
that
bringing
the
the
nonprofit
sector
to
to
the
the
the
mix
I
think
it
was
crucial.
It
was
imperative
and
I
think
that
we
are
here
today
and
I-
put
some
thought
into
this,
because
we
had
a
few
ingredients
that
were
right.
We
had
a
lot
of
challenges.
It
was
extremely
frustrating.
C
It
was
I
think
that
a
lot
of
us
felt
that
it
was
not
fair,
the
situation
that
we
were
put
in
the
hands
that
we
were
given
to
play,
but
I
think
when
you
look
back
and
I
say
I
see,
this
was
only
possible
because
we
had
four
things
to
play
with.
One
was
the
perseverance
of
the
community.
They
were
persistent.
They
focused
on
the
need
for
more
affordable
housing
and
I.
Think
having
that
pressure
was
important
to
focus
everybody
and
to
ante
to
get
that
going.
C
The
ingenuity
and
the
innovation
of
the
sector
was
essential
and
habitat
and
st.
Clair's
I
can't.
Thank
you
enough.
You
really
made
this
land
trust.
This
was
your
idea.
You
put
it
on
the
table,
everybody
believed
in
it
and
and
I
think
I
think
this
is
great
work
forward
and
and
and
kudos
to
you.
The
third
was
actually
having
a
developer.
They
wanted
to
get
to
a
yes,
and
that
saw
this
as
the
beginning
of
a
relationship.
C
They
see
this
as
they're
just
starting
the
relationship
with
this
community
and
they're
gonna,
be
here
for
a
number
of
years
and
and
they
wanted
to
start
it
on
a
on
a
good
foot.
Iii
got
that
and
then
the
fourth
I
have
to
say
and
as
much
as
some
people
complained
about.
You
know
that
the
process
and
the
planning
and
this
we
had
an
incredible
supportive
team
at
the
city,
because
the
amount
of
time
that
they
spent
and
the
what
they've
allow
us
to
explore.
C
You
know
many
people
could
have
been
around
the
table
and
say
this
is
not
possible.
I'm
not
doing
this.
We
need
to
move
forward
and
every
time
I
would
go
to
them
and
say,
let's
slow
down,
let's
give
it
a
little
bit
more
time.
Let's
that
you
know
habitat
is
talking
to
right
the
residents,
let's,
let's
slow
down,
give
me
a
little
bit
more
time.
They
were
open
to
this.
They
were
open
to
to.
C
Let
us
explore
these
things
and
I
think
they
need
to
be
recognized
and
when
we
needed
to
to
have
them
put
the
foot
to
the
pedal,
because
we
had
an
agreement
and
let's
make
sure
that
it
goes
through
and
have
the
report
through
they
come.
They
came
through
and
so
Kirk
and
Willie
and
and
planning
and
housing
that
also
allowed
us
to
explore
and
in
and
the
Housing
Secretariat
and
and
the
developer
really
reached
out
to
the
houses,
did
habitat
and
so
on,
to
bring
them
to
the
table.
C
C
C
A
H
H
People-
and
this
is
only
now
coming
to
fruition,
what
a
mess
the
education
system
is
in
once
it
was
taken
over
by
the
province
and
by
Mike
Harris,
and
just
for
the
record,
all
you
great
folks
from
Davenport.
The
vote
was
1210
to
close
Ursula
Franklin
and
move
it
and
myself
and
councillor
Carol
who
were
there.
H
Talking
about
this,
because
this
was
this-
is
only
the
end
of
a
crazy
making
ridiculous
approach
to
education
that
we've
lived
through
and
by
the
way
today,
there's
a
strike
on.
We
are
still
living
through
that
crazy
time.
So
I
was
at
many
meetings
as
well
my
role
as
councilor
around
a
hub.
We
had
them
everywhere
across
the
city.
There
was
so
many
there
was
a
hub
person
hired.
It
was
under
the
premier
we're
having
hubs.
H
We've
got
to
have
hubs
hub
hub,
hub,
hub
and
and
numerous
meetings
with
the
United
Way,
the
social
Planning
Council,
with
probably
what
the
city
was
constant
about
getting
a
hub
and
now
today,
I
find
they
negotiated
a
hub
and
then
didn't
put
the
bloody
money
in
for
the
hub.
Now,
that's
pathetic
and
we're
trying
to
make
up
for
all
of
this
ham-fisted
poor
policy
that
has
been
in
the
education
system
and
that
the
Toronto
District
District,
School,
Board
I,
didn't
know.
H
H
Many
of
you
are
on
that
and
I
know
how
hard
councillor
by
law
has
worked
to
try
to
take
all
these
crazy
pieces
and
come
up
with
something
that's
manageable,
workable
and
find
some
money,
because
the
province
short-shifted
this
city
and
this
community
on
its
obligation
for
a
hub.
So
I
never
want
to
hear
anybody
talk
about
provincial
hubs
anymore,
because
that's
not
good
I
just
want
to
say
as
well
that
the
whole
thing
about
a
land
trust
that
more
and
more.
H
These
ideas
that
are
very
exciting
and
and
really
new
emerging
formations
in
the
city
around
housing.
I
want
to
congratulate
you
all
on
creating
that
on
bringing
that
in
and
putting
it
in
the
mix.
We
have
Parkdale
with
a
Land
Trust
there'll
be
a
Land
Trust
around
the
single-family
homes
when
TD,
when
TC
HC
finally
turns
them
over.
H
Rather
than
sells,
six
hundred
homes,
and
so
out
of
this
mess,
we've
created
quite
a
few
exciting
things,
including
that
and
so
I
just
want
to
say,
job
well
done
in
an
exceedingly
difficult,
difficult
situation,
and
there
you
go
perhaps
we'll
get
back
to
a
proper
education
system
and
better
relations
between
the
city
and
the
province
in
the
nearest
future
possible.
Thank
you.
M
M
One
with
the
developers
need
to
to
extract
profits
and
then
to
balance
the
needs
of
the
community
and
and
under
all
of
that,
our
framework
of
provincial
planning
policies.
And
what
have
you
so
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
the
the
councillor
in
her
role
and
in
her
leadership,
and
also
to
recognize
that
this
is
not
the
first
time,
and
it
certainly
won't
be
the
last
time
where
the
City
of
Toronto
and
local
communities
have
been
subject
to.
M
Things
have
happened
to
them,
especially
when
it
pertains
to
land
sales
through
other
orders
of
government,
perhaps
through
disposition
through
school
boards,
whether
it's
Catholic
or
our
public.
And
it's
never.
A
good
place
to
be
a
good
place
to
be.
Is
when
you're
actually
proactively
working
together
to
come
under
one
umbrella
to
meet
those
broader
legislative
as
well
as
City
objectives.
But
that
doesn't
seem
to
always
be
the
case
as
as
different
divisions
and
different
ministries.
Work
in
silos
and
and
it
always
puts
the
community
under
tremendous
pressure.
M
So,
however,
you
you
decide
to
sort
of
analyze
it
and
and
and
and
unpack
the
process,
and-
and
there
could
be
a
lot
that
is
said,
but
this
is
not
an
ideal
way
for
us
to
to
make
informed
land-use
planning
decisions
at
the
end
of
the
day
and
and
I
know
that
in
my
own
board,
in
Ward
13,
we
had
a
situation
where
the
residents
literally
marched
onto
Queens
Park.
We
demonstrated
with
signs.
M
We
literally
took
down
a
fence
that
was,
that
was
encasing
a
parcel
of
publicly
owned
land
bounded
by
Wellesley
Bret,
o
Bain
young
and
Bay
Street.
Like
literally
my
Bay
Street
residents,
took
down
physically,
took
down
and
cut
the
fence
to
occupy
that
bit
of
public
space
and
all
they
were
ever
looking
for
was
a
park
at
that
point
in
time.
M
But
the
provincial
government
would
rather
keep
a
fence
up
and
do
nothing
with
the
land
for
literally
15
years
before
they
ultimately
decide
to
sell
to
the
great
opposition
of
the
local
community,
the
local
councillor.
And
then
we
were
then
left
with
the
very
unpleasant
situation
where
we
had
to
negotiate
with
the
developer.
To
swallow.
A
lot
of
density
and
then
to
buy
back
and
can
to
contribute
public
dollars
to
buy
back
from
the
developer,
who
purchased
a
land
from
the
province
to
assemble
a
park
together.
Our
win
is
a
1.6
acre
park.
M
That's
called
now
dr.
Lillian
McGregor
Park,
but
that
was
a
very
complicated
situation,
a
very
compromised
process
and
we
try
to
make
lemonade
out
of
lemons.
So
I
just
want
to
commend
everyone
by
way
of
participating
in
this
process.
I
know
this
is
these
are
not
the
conditions
you
would
have
won
to
walk
into
and
say,
let's
build
a
dynamic
and
viable
and
sustainable
inclusive
neighborhood
together,
but
we
are
working
under
much
bigger,
more
complicated,
contextual
planning,
environments
and-
and
you
move
through
it
with
a
lot
of
sophistication.
M
Clearly,
you
were
highly
innovated
and
modem,
motivated
and
I
think
that
it
actually
came
together
because
of
all
those
four
factors
that
councilor
viola
listed,
including
the
fact
that
she
herself
and
her
leadership
helped
Shepherd
this
across
the
finish
line.
So
thank
you,
I
want
to
add
those
comments.
There
Thank.
J
This
is
probably
gonna
reiterate
some
points
here,
because
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
repeat
them
enough
times,
but
this
is
I
kind
of
see
this.
As
the
case
of
making
making
the
best
of
a
bad
hand,
we
were
dealt
a
bad
hand.
The
Toronto
lands,
Toronto,
Land,
Corporation,
didn't
and
doesn't
have
a
mandate
to
uphold
the
public
good
to
build,
affordable
housing
to
build
parkland
it's
about
monetizing
assets.
We've
heard
that
language
in
our
own
City
of
Toronto
bodies
as
well.
J
J
Nothing,
and
now
this
government
back
peddling
on
the
commitments
from
the
from
the
previous
government,
which
were
tough
enough
to
achieve,
and
that
was
the
original
delay
that
meant
that
it
couldn't
happen
on
this
property.
We
weren't
able
to
secure
that
instead,
we've
got
to
go
through.
We
have
to
have
the
community
help
us
get
it
through
the
back
door,
the
Ontario,
Municipal
Board
or
the
land
tribunal
back
to
the
municipal
board.
Call
it
what
you
will
we're
now
back
to
the
same
rules
that
stock
the
deck
in
favor
of
the
developers.
J
J
J
We're
gonna
have
less
ability
to
come
up
with
arrangements
like
this
that
try
to
make
up
for
the
the
lack
of
municipal
and
community
controls
in
our
land,
use,
planning,
less
power
for
communities
and
municipalities
in
this
new
new
order.
This
new
Ford
World
Order,
now
one
thing
that
I
thought
was
particularly
innovative
in
this
that
I
hadn't,
seen
before
and
I
have,
since
out
of
briefing
from
the
affordable
housing
office,
because
I'm
certainly
going
to
be
looking
to
it.
J
More
is
the
use
of
development
charges
the
money
collected
from
development
charges,
because
there
was
a
development
charge
reserve
fund
that
was
used
to
fund
some
of
this
affordable
housing
and
it
was
it
I've,
never
seen
it
used
in
Ward
in
Ward
what
was
Ward
19
and
now
what
11?
But
we
had
opportunities
to
use
that
money
and
I'm
surprised
that
it
didn't
come
to
the
table,
because,
when
I
have
developers
saying
oh,
no,
the
the
open
doors
policy
just
isn't
enough.
J
This
new
land
trust
model
I'm.
So
sorry
that
you
need
to
even
do
stuff
like
this,
like
the
government,
is
in
that
role
to
be
the
land
trust
and
if
you
look
at
Toronto
lands
Corp.
If
you
look
at
build
Toronto
and
what
the
city
has
done,
we
haven't
done
a
job
to
give
a
ton
of
confidence
to
the
community.
That's
fighting
for
affordable
housing.
We
haven't
done
a
good
enough
job.
I
would
love,
as
we've
heard
from
the
speaker.
I,
would
love
to
think
that
this
new
housing
plan
changes
things
in
one
iota.
J
J
Commissioner
I,
don't
think
because
of
the
planning
rules,
the
way
they
exist,
they
would
be
able
to
do
anything
any
different
and
if
status
quo
is,
is
all
that
we're
able
to
achieve,
and
we
look
at
a
development
proposal
like
this,
and
we
can
say
how
would
this
be
made
better
under
what
we
have
proposed
and-
and
the
answer
is
realistically
not
much,
and
maybe
it
actually
is
worse.
I
think
that
I
think
that
that's
that's
something.
We
need
to
really
put
some
consideration
to
moving
forward.
A
Okay,
I'd
like
to
say
a
couple
words
so
at
the
heart
of
all
of
this
are
two
things:
the
heart.
The
first
thing
is
that
in
Ontario,
particularly
but
in
Canada
generally,
the
rights
of
property
speculators,
Trump
the
rights
of
the
community
and
in
Ontario
frankly,
is
the
worst
jurisdiction
in
Canada
and
possibly
in
North
America,
in
terms
of
the
balance
between
the
rights
of
land,
speculators
and
the
community
at
large,
and
you
know
kudos
to
everybody
who
worked
on
this-
that
we
were
able
to
get
anything
out
of
this.
A
One
thing
that
makes
me
quite
sad,
though,
is
that
there's
a
little
bit
of
sin
in
that
arena.
There's
a
little
bit
of
disagreement
that
emerged
between
the
various
stakeholders
saying
you
know
you
didn't
do
a
good
enough
job.
No,
you
didn't
do
a
good
enough
job.
No,
it's
that
you
know.
We've
been
tossed
into
an
arena
and
told
to
fight
over
scraps.
A
That's
planning
law
in
the
province
of
Ontario
and
I
know
that
they
all
the
actors
here
are
people
of
goodwill
and
in
a
couple
of
months
or
weeks,
when
we've
all
had
a
chance
to
digest
the
scraps
that
we
got
we'll
all
feel
better
about
working
together
again
and
but
I
think.
Do
you
think
that's
one
of
the
things
that
made
me
quite
sad
watching
this
one
move
forward
that
the
the
culprit,
which
is
the
worst
planning
law
that
I'm
aware
of
in
North
America
got
away.
A
A
A
H
A
And
it's
worth
remembering
that
the
province
of
Ontario
did
not
put
a
dime
into
the
operation
of
the
Toronto
District
School
District
schools,
the
construction
of
schools,
the
maintenance
of
schools,
the
education
of
kids
in
those
schools
was
paid
for
entirely
by
Torontonians,
and
here
we
are
in
a
moment
when
I
prevent
a
piece
of
provincial
legislation,
said
we're
going
to
take
that
asset
that
this
community
funded
and
we
are
going
to
monetize
it
and
give
it
to
a
private
interest
that
can
speculate
on
it
and
build
for-profit
housing.
It
is
staggering.
A
It
is
staggering
it's
worth
remembering
that
the
history
of
provincial
assaults
on
the
city
of
Toronto
is
not
a
not
a
recent
thing.
It
is
a
long
long-standing
problem.
I
mean
you
know,
I've,
always
sort
of
kind
of
wished.
We
had
a
provincial
party,
the
bloc
Toronto,
or
something
like
that,
but
I
think
it
I
think
that
when
we
have
an
item
like
this
in
front
of
us,
it's
worth
remembering
we
have
the
worst
planning
laws
on
the
continent
and
the
province
of
Ontario
steals
our
assets.
A
If
we
are
going
to
build
the
kinds
of
communities
that
we
want
to
raise
happy
whole
well,
rounded
people
from
all
walks
of
life
in
these
two
circumstances
must
be
met.
We
must
get
the
province
of
Ontario
to
recognize.
The
people
who
live
here
have
at
least
equal
rights
to
the
people
who
want
to
monetize
here,
and
we
have
to
get
the
province
of
Ontario
to
stop
stealing
things
from
the
people
of
Toronto.
Thank
you.
A
Counselor
by
Lao
has
moved
an
amendment.
I
would
I'd
like
to
propose,
as
we
do
the
amendment
and
then
I
would
like
to
record
the
vote
on
the
item.
So
on
the
amendment
all
those
in
favor
pose
carried
on
the
item,
all
those
in
favor
councillor,
Cressey,
councillor,
Bradford
councillor
by
Lyle,
councillor,
Fletcher,
councillor,
perks,
counselor,
Wong,
town,
councillor,
Layton,
councillor,
Matt,
Lowe,
that's
unanimous
and
it's
all
members
present.
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
so
I
believe
we
had
one
little
item
left
before
we
go
to
the
or
is
it
right
to
thirty?
Five?
Six?
Oh
sorry,
yeah,
okay,
so
item
six
councillor
by
Lao
before
you
run
away
yeah,
we
have
to
do
the
intention
to
designate
yeah
so
item
six.
This
is
the
Heritage
heyguys,
blue
or
Dufferin
gang
don't
go
away.
This
is
the
intention
to
designate.
A
H
A
A
A
A
N
Can
we
turn
on
the
speakers
on?
Thank
you
for
hearing
us.
My
name
is
Bill
o
Henley
everything
we're
saying
here
is
already
in
my
submission
sent
last
Friday.
We
have
four
requests
of
community
council
number
one
transportation
services
in
it's
November,
26th
report
on
this
item
says
the
permanent
parking
requires
a
more
balanced
and
strategic
approach
across
the
city
that
a
report
on
that
is
due
in
early
2021.
N
The
future
decisions
on
permit
parking
should
hold
off
until
then.
The
current
permit
parking
approach
is
a
temporary
band-aid
solution
with
inconsistent
application
whar
toward
we
asked
the
council
vote
to
defer
the
permit
parking
extension
until
that
work
is
done
in
2021,
as
recommended
by
city
staff.
N
If
council
does
not
defer
a
permit
parking
that
a
demand
permit
parking
motion
that
it
does
pass
to
exclude
the
streets
in
Ward
4,
as
was
done
in
Josh
Matt
Lowe's
Ward
12,
so
that
that
area
continues
to
have
resident,
petition
and
polling
provisions
of
the
current
permit
parking
bylaw
until
2021
or
that
it
implement
polling,
as
was
done
in
Brad
Brad.
First
ward
night
number.
N
If
presidents
of
any
Street
submit
to
the
city
a
petition
with
more
than
sixty
percent,
that's
a
supermajority
in
favor
of
opting
out
or
converting
to
Street
only
versus
area
permit
parking
that
Street
would
be
opted
out
or
converted
automatically,
as
requested
within
a
reasonable
period
after
the
city
has
verified
that
the
petition
is
proper.
Why
do
we
ask
this
in
old
Ward
thirteen
now
Ward?
Four?
We
felt
we
feel
misled
by
councillor
perks
on
permit
parking.
Other
Ward's
followed
a
robust
consultation
process
explaining
the
current
bylaw
protections
and
the
proposal
to
amend
it.
N
Soliciting
feedback
and
reporting
the
results
and
staff
answers
to
resident
concerns.
None
of
that
was
done
in
world
war.
Thirteen
no
effort
was
ever
made
at
the
June
or
September
community
meetings
to
inform
or
solicit
feedback,
as
required
in
te
27
point
four:
nine
or
respect
the
consultation
process
used
in
other
Ward's
as
set
out
in
te
7.78
notification.
The
first
meeting
was
poor,
most
found
out
by
word
of
mouth
at
the
meeting
we
were
kept
in
the
dark
current
bylaw
protections
and
the
intention
to
eliminate
them
were
never
even
mentioned.
N
Councillor
perks
told
us
that
permit
parking
had
already
been
approved
in
East
York
and
thanks
to
Doug
Ford.
We
were
now
stuck
with
it
and
there
was
no
legal
Avenue
to
oppose
it
or
to
provide
feedback
or
whether
we
on
whether
we
wanted
it
or
not
and
no
point
sending
a
petition.
Since,
even
if
every
person
on
every
street
opposed
it
it's
a
done
deal,
we
could
only
comment
on
which
streets
we
would
suggest
go
with
which
streets
I
find
that
very
interesting.
Giving
the
comments
that
were
just
given
on
how
important
community
consultation
is.
N
We
feel
that
this
attempt
to
push
through
Ward
for
a
permit
parking
without
allowing
his
constituents
to
know
about
the
bylaw
and
his
push
to
amend.
It
is
just
wrong
when
we
met
with
councilor
perks
on
November
the
15th
we
raised
all
this,
but
he
said
it
doesn't
matter.
He
technically
held
two
community
meetings
and
got
resoundingly
negative
feedback,
even
though
he
did
not
raise
the
bylaw
issues
at
all,
nor
allow
discussion
of
them,
even
if
he
publicly
dismissed
all
our
feedback
as
invalid,
which
he
did.
He
says
that
it
was
sent
to
city
staff.
N
D
Constituents
he
said
he
had
done
that
before
and
will
do
it
again.
Even
if
it's
all
constituents
on
all
86
streets,
he'll
decide
what's
right
and
if
we
don't
like
it,
we
could
always
vote
him
out.
We
ask
that
the
Toronto
East
York
community
council
recognize
and
reverse
what
we
consider
to
be
a
trampling
of
bylaw
rights
of
constituents
in
the
old
Ward
13
portion
of
our
Ward
4.
By
considering
the
motions
we
are
making.
If
not,
then
City
Council
should
be
asked
to
if
it
gets
the
same.
D
So
why
don't
we
want
permit
parking
imposed?
There
are
many
reasons
here.
At
least
four
people
have
received
advice
from
local
real
estate
agents
that
permit
parking
could
negatively
impact
their
property
value
by
adding
congestion
due
to
increase
parking
which
affects
snowplows
and
garbage
trucks
and
emergency
vehicle
to
access
causing
additional
traffic.
That
normally
would
not
even
use
the
street
except
to
find
permit
parking
spots
and
eliminating
the
children
friendly
and
elder
safe
nature
of
these
streets,
qualities
that
justified
the
higher
prices
paid
by
residents
for
these
homes.
D
Permit
parking
may
add
value
and
appeal
to
properties
on
high-density
streets.
In
a
traffic
heavy
grid,
where
many
people
have
no
driveway
and
therefore
need
permit
parking
to
enhance
quality
of
life
and
house
values,
but
for
our
low-density
streets,
where
people
already
have
a
driveway
and
don't
require
as
much
street
parking
and
where
traffic
is
limited,
it
detracts
from
the
quality
of
our
street
and
the
value
of
our
properties.
Our
streets
become
a
cheap
parking
lot
for
distracted
drivers
from
higher
density
streets.
D
Looking
for
an
overnight
space,
since
most
residents
of
these
added
streets
already
have
driveways
a
parking
pyramid
on
their
own
Street
will
cost
three
times
as
much
as
a
resident
of
a
neighboring
street
without
a
driveway,
so
permit
parking
brings
no
benefit
here
to
residents
of
these
streets.
That's
why
these
streets
are
different
and
should
be
able
to
choose.
D
D
We
are
concerned
that
we
will
see
increased
overflow
parking
from
Bloor
West
condos,
especially
future
condos,
where
the
city
is
allowing
developers
to
build
less
than
one
parking
spot
per
unit.
We
see
condo
developers
primary
beneficiaries
of
adding
this
huge
cheap
parking
lot,
as
it
will
reduce
developer
building
costs
and
increase
what
they
can
charge
for
a
spot
while
dumping
overflow
condo
parking
demand
on
to
nearby
city
streets.
D
That's
why
we
propose
that
council
require
every
new
condo
to
build
a
parking
spot
for
each
unit
and
appropriate
spots
for
any
retailers
in
the
building
to
satisfy
all
demand
for
parking.
Any
spots
not
taken
should
be
available
to
rent,
to
help
soak
up
demand
on
busy
permit
parking
streets
and
that
each
condo
development
should
also
be
its
own
permit
parking
area.
O
Lea
minister,
at
least
I'm
honest,
why
should
this
community
council
reconsider
across-the-board
permit
parking
on
the
86
streets
in
old,
Ward
13,
now
Ward
4?
We
will
feel
we
feel
it
will
be
a
money
losing
proposition
on
our
86
streets.
The
projected
revenues
of
permit
parking
in
the
April
1
2019
report
are
overstated.
Streets
across
the
city
that
have
managed
to
escape.
Permit
parking
should
be
removed
from
projected
revenues.
The
25%
take-up
assumption
is
too
high
for
our
86
streets.
O
Most
residents
on
those
streets
don't
need
permit
parking
and
most
of
these
streets
ramble
far
away
from
the
grid
streets
that
need
permit
parking.
Ward
4
area
1l
will
generate
virtually
no
permit
parking
revenues.
Meanwhile,
the
fixed
costs
associated
with
permit
parking
are
about
6.2
million
upfront
with
annual
costs
of
almost
half
a
million
dollars.
Permit
parking
is
unlikely
to
pay
for
itself
here.
O
Council
can
reduce
those
fixed
and
variable
costs
by
removing
those
86
streets,
as
requested
in
our
fourth
motion.
Better
still,
the
November
26
report
says
that
the
hole
permit
parking
matter
needs
to
be
revisited
with
a
more
balanced
and
strategic
approach.
Don't
rush
this
through
now.
Let
transportation
services
do
their
job.
Council
should
approve
our
motion
to
defer
this
until
a
more
strategic
and
balanced
approach
is
decided
in
2021,
as
recommended
by
city
staff.
O
Counselor
Kirk
says
that
this
is
an
equity
issue
that
people
two
or
three
streets
over
have
to
pay
for
a
permit,
but
we
don't
first,
the
higher
values
of
homes
on
those
86
streets
and
the
higher
taxes
paid
on
those
values.
Take
that
into
account
also
homes
with
no
driveway.
You
get
a
property
tax
discount.
More
importantly,
if
someone
from
another
street
decides
to
park
overnight
on
our
street,
they
run
the
same
risk
of
getting
a
ticket
as
we
do
so
there
is
no
equity
issue
here.
Residents
are
happy
with
the
three
hour
rule.
O
Permit
parking
introduces
two
inequities.
A
person
without
a
driveway
two
streets
over
can
get
a
permit
parking
spot
in
front
of
my
home
24/7
for
one-third
of
what
I
would
pay
for
that
same
spot.
Second,
whereas
other
Ward's
in
teu,
I
got
a
robust
communication
and
feedback
opportunity.
Old,
Ward,
13
didn't
that
is
extremely
inequitable.
O
Councillor
perks
keeps
telling
us
that
this
is
being
driven
by
some
waiting
list,
but
on
November
15th
we
asked
where
the
demand
is.
We
didn't
want
addresses
just
some
objective
measure.
He
would
not
tell
us
a
signed
petition
done
this
weekend
showed
that
on
my
Street
Palisades,
there
is
no
demand
of
the
33
households.
28
responded
and
of
those
96
percent
opposed
permit
parking.
In
the
absence
of
objective
evidence
of
demand
for
permit
parking.
We
and
you
need
to
ask
who
benefits
from
this
effort.
O
Not
residents,
not
the
city,
perhaps
saving
condo
developer
costs,
then
that
is
not
an
equity
issue.
On
November
15th
councillor
perks
referred
to
you,
his
fellow
councillors
as
cowards
for
agreeing
to
listen
to
their
constituents.
When
making
these
decisions
he
said,
permit
parking
must
be
applied
across
the
city.
We
pointed
out
that
it
will
be
handled
differently
in
each
Ward,
so
it
will
not
be
applied
consistently.
Ward
4
is
pushing
through
permit
parking
in
old
Ward
13
without
consultation
other
than
on
boundaries.
O
Ward's
10,
11
and
13
are
going
to
full
consultation
and
ward
19
is
repoing.
This
inconsistent
approach
represents
a
disparity
in
the
treatment
of
Toronto
residents.
The
February
2019
consultation
summary
recognize.
The
concern
that
permit
parking
will
turn
streets
into
cheap
parking
lots
for
neighboring
streets.
It
responded
as
follows:
the
only
people
who
would
be
able
to
park
on
the
street
would
be
people
who
live
on
a
street
and
or
their
guests.
This
is
the
main
purpose
for
having
a
permit
parking
program.
We
ask
transportation
services.
O
Could
we
ask
for
Street
only
permit
parking
or
opt
out
where
our
street
has
a
driveway
for
each
home
and
we
see
no
benefit
from
permit
parking?
They
said
we
have
the
right
to
petition
and
to
opt
out
or
convert,
but
that
would
go
to
councillor
perks.
We
asked
councillor
perks
if
he
would
block
such
a
petition.
He
told
us
on
November
15th
that,
even
if
every
household
on
any
given
Street
or
on
any
street
filed
such
petitions,
he
would
block
the
petition
from
going
to
this
Community
Council
for
consideration.
O
L
Me
I'm
also
a
resident
Swansea
councillor
perks
is
planning
to
create
a
new
large
and
cheap
86th
Street
permit
parking
lot
in
Ward
4,
which
will
attract
even
more
cars
to
the
area,
but
couraging
people
in
the
area
to
buy
additional
cars
because
parking
is
easier,
creating
more
pollution.
How
will
this
reduce
Toronto's
contribution
to
climate
change?
L
Several
people
have
told
us
they
met
with
councilor
perks
separately,
but
any
arguments
they
made,
such
as
those
we've
mentioned,
were
simply
dismissed
as
they
were
at
the
to
community
meetings,
including
the
fact
that
many
residents,
including
myself
of
the
86
streets
in
old
Ward
13,
were
still
unaware
that
this
change
to
bring
in
permit
parking
is
even
going
on.
Councillor
perks,
told
us
on
November
15th
that
he
will
propose
amending
the
bylaw
to
remove
the
current
petition
and
polling
provisions
and
push
permit
parking
through.
L
L
This
could
occur
before
signage
and
other
costs
are
encouraged
so
that
these
costs
could
be
averted
where
the
street
clearly
wants
to
opt
out.
Councillor
perks
has
said
no
to
that.
No
one
opts
out
as
long
as
he
is
councillor
and
lastly,
if,
and
only
if
this
council
still
passes
emotion
to
impose
permit
parking
in
Ward
4
councils
should
include
a
provision
that
allows
residents
of
any
of
these
86
streets
to
opt
out
of
permit
parking
or
to
convert
to
street
only
permit
parking
in
Ward
4
area.
L
One
H,
if
60%
sign
a
petition
to
that
effect
and
that
Street
would
be
opted
out
or
converted
automatically
councillor
perks
would
get
permit
parking
installed
on
every
Street,
where
there
was
no
such
objection,
and
only
those
streets
with
the
60%
supermajority
would
be
allowed
to
opt
out
or
convert
as
other
streets
across
the
city.
Can.
L
Specifically
item
number
one
regarding
the
proposed
area
boundaries
on
street
parking
in
Ward
4
an
attachment
a
in
l1l
zone.
This
is
my
area
and
where
I
live.
That
is,
we
do
not
want
permit
parking
on
my
street
of
pulley
guards
nor
our
immediate
rule.
A
neighbor's,
neighborhood
and
I
have
a
map
here
which
shows
what
that
neighborhood
is.
L
This
is
the
gate
entering
googily
neighborhood,
and
this
this
is
fully
Gardens
with
a
crescent.
This
is
Riverside
trail.
What
you're
dead
ends
here,
and
this
is
Google
a
terrace
with
wandering
feet
going
out.
This
is
a
an
entity
on
its
own
was
the
Humber
pond
to
the
west.
We
have
an
extreme
drop
here
between
Riverside
Drive
and
this
the
streets
on
Bullock
for
essence.
So
this
is
a
distinct
geological
entity.
L
No
I
had
one
time
and
I
think
this
is
unique
in
it.
In
that
it's
one
area.
My
point
is
that
this
area
has
always
been
a
unique
area
without
permit
parking.
We
have
lots
of
natural
terrain,
animals
and
kids
playing
on
the
street,
and
we
are
quite
satisfied
that
we
do
not
need
permit
parking
for
that
fact
that
every
one
of
the
houses
has
two
or
three
parking
space
in
our
driveway.
We
have
three
hours
parking
on
the
street
and
we've
lived
with
this.
L
We're
happening
up
to
this
point
and
we
do
not
see
the
need
for
any
change
and
the
fact
if
it
were
to
be
allowed
for
permit
parking
in
fact
compromise
our
so
called
outdoor
living
space
scenario,
which
is
unique
to
Toronto,
and
we
don't
see
that
we
should
have
compromises
with
our
parking
to
to
destroy
what
we
have
as
a
natural
environment
with
people.
Only
the
other
issue
is
the
glaring
contradiction,
painting
the
city
and
it
and
the
transportation
part
transportation
policies.
L
Is
this
overriding
policy
not
contradicted
by
the
city,
transportation,
service,
department,
policy
of
thrusting,
more
cars?
If
I
permit
parking
cross,
our
neighborhoods
is
there?
Is
there
car
orientated
policy
not
creating
more
air
pollution,
global
warming
and
climate
change?
Should
a
city
not
restrict
the
use
of
cars
and
instead
Korea
neighborhood
street
for
walking,
bicycling
and
playing
this?
Is
our
outdoor
living
area
enclosing
bullying,
gardens
such
a
cluster
of
unique
pedestrian
orientated
streets?
We
wish
you
to
keep
it
that
way.
L
P
Hi
Margo,
the
area
I'm
speaking
about
is
the
city
in
the
northwest
corner
of
the
ward,
counselors
and
staff.
My
deputation
is
respecting
Ward
for
recommendations
and,
specifically
the
area
identified.
An
attachment
a
to
the
26
November
staff
report
is
one
K
in
the
summary.
It
states
that
a
request
was
to
review
proposed
boundaries
in
words,
four,
nine
and
fourteen,
but
a
119
to
review
the
feasibility
of
pulling
all
streets.
P
Please
ensure
the
permit
parking
is
only
imposed
if
a
pool
has
been
completed
on
the
street
or
in
the
neighborhood,
no
matter
what
Ward
is
involved
in
the
recommendation.
That
says
states
there
to
be
received,
please
clarify
received,
and
if
that
means
no
action
be
taken.
Please
adopt
the
recommendations
and
receive
this
report
in
the
financial
impact
section
that
states
that
there
is
no
financial
impact.
Is
this
because
the
recommendations
are
to
receive
so
that
no
permanent
parking
would
be
implemented?
P
Therefore,
no
financial
impact
in
October
2017
transportation
services
report
to
undertake
on
street
parking
or
field
surveys.
It
does
not
state
the
staff
should
evaluate
the
necessity
of
imposing
permanent
parking
in
these
areas,
nor
the
will
of
the
residents
to
have
the
system
imposed
on
their
neighborhood.
Please
add
a
requirement
to
meet
with
the
unique
communities
and
determine
the
need
to
impose
permit
parking
on
them.
Although
I
understand
the
need
for
permanent
parking
in
many
areas,
especially
the
downtown
and
older
areas,
I
lived
on
Maitland
and
in
Yorkville
and
Novell.
P
What
a
nightmare
parking
can
be
and
I
also
know
that
it
is
not
necessary
in
our
area
of
the
new
West
portion
of
Ward
4
I
am
concerned
that
the
imposition
of
this
will
encourage
developers
to
continue
reducing
parking
on
site
for
their
residents.
Communities
should
not
have
their
timber
altered
because
the
city
allows
or
requires
developments
to
under
build
parking
will
not
increase
the
public
transit.
P
The
report
states
that
staff
were
to
ensure
that
the
process
to
determine
appropriate
area
boundaries
for
wards
for
nine
and
fourteen
includes
analysis
of
proximity
to
natural
divides
in
Ward
4.
There
were
two
public
consultations
at
which
the
response
was
resoundingly
opposed
to
the
imposition
permit
party
at
all
and
to
the
post,
size
and
boundaries
of
the
staff
recommended
permit
parking
areas.
At
the
last
consultation,
I
raised
the
natural
divide
in
our
area,
a
significantly
steep
ravine
between
Humber
crest,
Boulevard
and
gooch
Avenue.
It's
about
150
foot
drop
over
about
100
feet.
P
It's
significant
leads
to
steep
that
TTC
would
not
run
a
bus
route
on
it.
I
asked
that
if
permit
parking
were
to
be
imposed
at
the
1k
area
be
divided,
so
that
our
Valley
remained
as
its
own
permanent
parking
area.
This
seems
to
have
fallen
on
deaf
ears,
as
the
1k
area
includes
both
these
streets.
Please
redraw
the
boundaries
should
permit
parking,
be
imposed
on
our
area
and
ensure
that
the
east
boundary
of
our
area
be
the
east
side
of
gooch
Avenue.
P
At
the
ravine,
the
26th
November
report
states
that
council
exempt
the
implementation
of
permit
parking
on
the
streets,
an
attachment
via
the
new
municipal
code
requirements
for
permit
parking,
including
both
the
petition
and
polling
requirement.
This
would
mean
the
requirement
to
petition
and
poll
would
be
waived
and
Wars
for
9
and
14
for
the
locations
listed
in
attachment.
B
I
had
no
streets
listed
in
my
attachment
B.
P
If
my
assumption
is
correct
to
ask
councillors
to
include
the
streets
in
the
West
portion
of
warrant
for
to
this
exclusion
and
to
amend
this
recommendation
to
ensure
the
polling
is
not
waived,
but
is
required
again
should
permit
parking
be
imposed
on
our
neighborhood.
Please
recognize
that
the
proposed
areas
are
geographically,
too
large
and
not
homogeneous.
Please
realign
the
1e
area
to
be
from
humber
crest
Boulevard
to
run
a
meet
in
a
net
to
Dundas.
P
This
area
is
geographically
homogeneous
with
sufficient
traffic
signals
to
cross
Jane
Street
if
needed,
leave
the
Warren
Park
community
as
its
own
area.
At
the
end
of
the
covering
port
report,
the
section
on
permit
parking
moving
forward
suggested
future
decisions
regarding
the
implementation
of
Lanna
street.
P
Permit
parking
should
be
held
in
abeyance
until
the
citywide
parking
strategy
study
is
complete
and
a
report
is
brought
to
City
Council
I
requested
any
permit
parking
suggested
for
the
new
West
Side
of
Ward
4
be
held
off
until
the
citywide
parking
strategy
is
complete
and
significant
local
specific
community
consultations
have
been
held
additionally,
I
requested
the
permit
parking
areas
be
smaller,
homogeneous,
consider
future
development
impact
and
not
be
considered
until
polling
has
been
done
in
each
recommended
permit
parking
area.
Our
city
is
made
up
of
unique,
interesting
and
inviting
neighborhoods
for
many
different
reasons.
P
Considerations
of
these
features
should
be
paramount
when
Council
considers
imposing
new
citywide
programs
on
neighborhoods.
It
isn't
necessarily
a
matter
of
how
much
property
tax
we
pay.
It
is
the
work
each
neighborhood
does
to
keep
its
identity
and
to
keep
it
an
attractive
place
to
live
work
and
raise
our
families
I.
P
Believe
that,
simply
because
our
neighborhood
has
been
moved
to
a
different
Community
Council,
it
should
not
be
subjected
to
programs
that
the
residents
are
clearly
opposed
to
one
size
fits
all,
does
not
work
in
all
cases,
and
in
this
case
it
fails
and
what
changes
could
destroy
our
unique
living
spaces.
The
things
that
attracted
us
to
buy
our
rental
homes
in
our
communities,
community,
council
and
council,
should
respect
the
opinions
of
residents
and
work
more
closely
with
them
when
programs
like
this
are
to
be
imposed.
Thank
you
for
your
answer.
A
H
H
A
H
P
P
We
don't
get
it
all
the
time,
but
we
certainly
do
get
people
who
park
overnight
or
over
the
three
hours,
certainly
to
do
it
tickets,
it's
not
all
the
time.
Okay,
it's
not
thank
you.
We
don't
have
the
parking
enforcement
stuff
to
do
that.
Oh
that's!
Right!
There
isn't
there
isn't
a
lot.
There
aren't
a
lot
of
them.
Okay!
Thank
you.
Okay!
Thank
you.
P
Q
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
appear
before
the
committee
I'm
Tula
alex
appleÃs
resident
of
24
brûléed
Crescent,
along
with
Brule
Gardens,
Brule,
Terrace
and
Riverside
trail.
These
streets
make
up
Brule
neighborhood
at
the
outset.
I
want
to
acknowledge
that
I
appreciate
that
permit
parking
isn't
is
essential
program
and
service.
We
need
permit
parking
for
streets
and
areas
where
there
is
poor
or
no
on-site
parking
for
residents.
Q
I
also
appreciate
that
there
are
complex
complexities
and
differing
views
on
this
subject,
but
I'm
here
today
to
kindly
request
that
councillors
respect
the
democratic
process.
The
residents
of
the
Brule
neighbor
neighborhood
are
strongly
opposed
to
permit
parking.
A
petition
opposing
permit
parking
was
signed
by
a
hundred
and
eighteen
residents
representing
73
households,
which
represents
80
percent
of
the
households
in
the
Brule
name,
neighborhood
and
I.
Think
if
we
were
a
little
more
persistent,
we
probably
would
have
gotten
a
hundred
percent
opposing
it.
Q
The
petition
was
delivered
to
the
clerk's
office
on
June
6th
of
this
year.
In
response
to
the
permit
parking
item
on
the
June
25th
meeting
of
this
council
meeting,
the
petition
noted
that
permit
parking
is
not
needed,
nor
desired
by
the
residents
of
the
Brule
neighborhood.
It
expressed
concern
that
permit
parking
will
change
the
stable
and
unique
physical
character
of
the
Brule
neighborhood,
that
is,
bordered
by
natural
divides,
the
Humber,
River
and
marshes
to
the
west
and
south.
The
reverse
ravine
to
the
east
and
Bloor
Street
to
the
north.
Q
Increasing
traffic
and
parking
cars
raises
concerns
raises
safety
concerns
for
residents
and
their
families
because
of
the
lack
of
sidewalks
in
our
neighborhood,
and
it
will
have
implications
for
services,
including
emergency
vehicles,
and
it
may
also
have
implications
for
the
deer
and
the
other
animals
that
are
frequent
visitors
to
our
lovely
neighborhood.
I
am
humbled
to
live
in
such
a
lovely
neighborhood,
surrounded
by
nature
and
I
feel
obligated,
along
with
my
Brule
neighbors,
to
defend
its
stability
and.
Q
We're
very
very
pleased
to
see
in
the
November
26
report
that
transportation
services
staff
are
developing
a
citywide
parking
strategy.
We
agree
with
the
recommendation
in
the
report
that
future
decisions
regarding
the
implementation
of
on-street
permit
parking
should
be
held
in
abeyance
until
considered
urgent
unless
considered
urgent.
Q
In
the
absence
of
a
citywide
strategy,
it
is
concerning
that
councilors
are
exercising
inconsistent
and
unequal
treatment
of
residents
across
the
wards
in
the
Toronto
in
East
York
District.
We
noticed
that
streets
in
Ward
12
that
currently
do
not
have
permit
parking,
have
been
removed
from
the
list
of
streets
to
be
converted
to
permit
parking.
Also
councilors
are
considering
the
feasibility
of
pulling
all
streets
in
Ward
19
to
determine
if
the
residents
wish
to
have
permit
parking
in
their
Road
or
area.
Q
It
is
unacceptable
to
permit
or
extend
the
double
the
democratic
process
to
some
residents
under
similar
circumstances
and
not
to
others.
We
respectfully
request
the
same
treatment
as
the
residents
of
Ward,
12
or,
alternatively,
have
the
streets
in
the
Brule
neighborhood
pulled
to
determine
if
the
residents
wish
to
have
permit
parking.
Q
In
conclusion,
I
would
like
to
say
that
permit
parking
should
not
be
imposed
on
neighborhoods
that
do
not
need
or
want
permit
parking.
We
remain
firmly
opposed
to
any
action
that
would
change
the
status
quo
or
eliminate
or
waive
the
requirement
to
petition
and
pole
for
residents
in
the
brouilly
neighborhood.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
R
A
R
R
But
in
the
report
which
an
item
that
concerned
us
is
is
number
two
here,
which
is,
it
could
potentially
be
it's
a
recommendation
that
that,
in
the
ward,
four
that
the
polling
and
and
petitioning
would
be
suspended
or
exam
they
would
be
exempt
and
that
permit
parking
would
be
applied
to
the
whole
to
all
the
streets
in
the
ward
and
which
leads
us
to
because
we
we
are
a
very
unique,
especially
in
Swansea.
We
have
every
attribute
of
zoning
as
every
zoning
attribute
you
can
imagine,
so
we
we.
R
We
have
concerns
that,
first
of
all
that
the
polling
would
be
eliminated
because
if,
if
the
permit
parking
is
is
applied
to
the
whole
area,
well,
then,
why
do
you
need
to
have
a
polling
thing?
Because
you,
you
know
you
don't
have
to
ask
for
it.
You've
already
got
it
so
and
secondly,
the
petition
would
be
futile
because
we
have
been
told
that
you
know
if
we
have
a
hundred
percent
request
for
removal
of
permit
parking
from
the
street.
R
It
would
not
be
respected
and
so
just
to
show
you
that
the
the
issues
around,
especially
in
particular
I,
give
you
two
to
two
our
areas
that
it
says
these
are
all
the
streets
and
they
do
they
talk
about
the
lens.
I
know:
I,
don't
know
whether
I
can
enlarge
this
here,
but
anyway
it
talks.
It
talks
about
two
two
streets
called
wind
yeah,
that's
right,
Windermere
place,
which
is
actually
seventy
nine
meters,
but
long.
R
R
Windemere
Avenue
between
the
lakeshore
and
Queensway
actually
goes
under
a
bridge,
and
it
has
said
it's
a
hundred
and
five
a
hundred
and
fifty
nine
meters
long
so
that
could
shouldn't
that's
going
to
be
under
this
total
permit
implementation.
It's
going
to
be
there,
so
we
have
to
be
vigilant
because
we
have
no
polling.
We've
know
with
no
petitioning
to
remove
it.
R
R
These
has
to
wait
to
turn
until
these
cars
get
away,
but
they
can't
get
away
be
and
they
have
to
go
up
on
the
curb
to
get
out
of
the
way
at
the
bus
to
let
them
through.
But
then
you
see
there's
the
school
bus
coming
along
and
then,
if
you
look
down
there,
there's
a
green
there's,
a
green
truck
and
that's
the
garbage
truck,
so
they
all
when
they
all
converge.
It's
it's
absolutely
chaos
and
it's
like
a
parking
lot,
don't
coming
down
Wyndemere,
but
yet,
under
this
total
permit
installation
we
are.
R
R
D
D
My
name
is
Janice
Calder.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
before
the
council.
I
live
on
Brule
Gardens,
but
I
felt
I.
If
it
wouldn't
be
right
for
me
just
to
speak
for
my
own
area,
so
I'm
going
to
speak
for
all
86
streets
in
the
new,
the
old
Ward
13
I've
pondered
this
and
tried
to
understand.
What's
going
on,
I'm
fairly
new
to
Toronto,
I
was
born
and
raised
here,
but
I
have
spent.
I
was
35
years
in
Calgary
and
I.
D
Just
came
back
so
I've
been
back
close
to
four
years
now
and
I
can't
believe.
What's
going
on
in
Toronto,
anyways
I
fail
to
see
why
we
must
have
permit
parking
on
the
88
88
686
streets
that
were
added
from
old
Ward
13
to
make
new
Ward
4.
Many
of
these
streets
are
isolated
enclaves
in
areas
far
from
the
main
grid
of
streets,
I
am
arguing
for
the
democratic
approach
of
polling
and
petition
to
petition,
which
is
in
the
current
bylaw.
D
Even
if
these
streets
are
grouped
into
zones,
they
should
be
given
the
right
to
choose
what
whether
or
not
they
want
permit
parking
using
the
petitioner
polling
method,
as
outlined
in
the
bylaw
to
install,
maintain
and
enforce
our
86
streets
with
permanent
parking
would
be
more
costly
than
leaving
them
as
is
or
just
letting
those
that
want
permit
parking
habit.
The
money
saved
would
be
better
spent
on
improving
our
transit
system,
which
is
climate
friendly,
Toronto
has
declared
a
climate
emergency.
We
need
to
start
addressing
this
matter.
D
The
low
cost
of
permit
parking
only
encourages
more
cars.
If
people
live
close
to
transit,
subways
streetcars
buses,
which
most
of
us
do
shouldn't,
we
be
discouraging
and
decreasing
the
number
of
cars.
We
seem
to
be
doing
two
contradictory
things
at
once.
Talking
about
decreasing
the
number
of
cars
while
increasing
the
number
of
cars
who
needs
transit
when
you
can
go
by
car
Toronto
is
car
city.
We
need
to
have
other
options
that
will
address
our
parking
needs.
There
should
be
studies
and
reports
on
this
for
us
to
consider
another
point.
D
We
will
be
destroying
the
character
of
many
streets
by
turning
them
into
parking
lots
when
it's
not
needed.
Streets
are
more
than
just
roads
for
cars
to
get
from
one
place
to
another.
They
bind
neighborhoods
and
neighbors.
Together
we
have
a
vested
interest
in
the
safety
and
appeal
of
our
roads.
Noise,
traffic
and
pollution
are
harming
our
health
and
is
only
getting
worse
as
the
city
grows.
D
D
I
should
say
this
I
love
animals,
these
areas
that
that
are
going
to
be
converted
or
want
that
you
want
to
convert
to
permit
parking
border
on
parks
and
marshes
and
rivers
and
ravines
there
you,
you
can
see
how
they
are
they're
sort
of
on
either
end
of
Swansea,
and
we
have
wild
abundant
wildlife.
Beautiful
wildlife
and
the
wildlife
doesn't
no
roads.
D
They
just
cross
from
one
ravine
to
another,
and
you
know
I
worry
about
people
who
don't
know
the
area
coming
in
and
they
wouldn't
know
to
watch
for
skunks
and
and
chipmunks
and
deer
I.
We
feel
we're
custodians
of
these
areas
because
we
live
there.
I've
lived
well,
I,
haven't
lived,
my
parents
moved
in
1958
and
and
I've
moved
back
into
their
house.
So
but
I
know
the
area
very
well.
So
I
just
hope
that
you
will
consider
not
having
permit
parking
for
now.
Thank.
A
S
At
least
a
long
day,
my
name
is
Corrine
Dumoulin
I
live
on
Bridge
View
Road,
which
is
part
of
the
former
award'
13
in
a
little
pocket
here
called
the
Old
Mill
side
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
Old
Mill
Side
residents
Association,
our
community
does
not
currently
have
on
street
permit
parking.
We
have
not
asked
for
it.
We
don't
want
it,
we
don't
need
it.
S
This
view
has
been
repeatedly
communicated
to
our
new
counselor.
However,
our
concerns
have
not
been
addressed.
That's
why
I'm
here
today
to
appeal
to
you,
the
councillors
of
Toronto
East
York
community,
that
you
listened
to
us
and
that
you
continue
to
allow
us
to
exercise
our
rights
to
have
a
democratic
say
and
to
have
the
right
to
polling
and
petitioning
as
it
pertains
to
on
street,
permit
parking
permit
parking
has
been
delegated
by
City
Council
to
community
councils,
because
there
are
so
many
important
local
considerations
that
have
to
be
taken
into
account.
S
The
polling
requirement
was
put
in
place
to
ensure
that
local
residents
have
input
on
permit
parking
on
the
streets
where
they
live
with
the
larger
wards
that
are
now
in
place,
councillors
need
local
feedback
more
than
ever
in
order
to
be
responsive
to
their
constituents
needs
and
concerns.
Removing
or
subverting
the
right
to
petition
and
polling
is
unfair
and
undemocratic.
S
There
has
been
no
adequate
explanation
as
to
why
this
policy
should
apply
to
our
neighborhood,
given
that
the
on
street
permit
parking
program
is
designed
for
situations
as
set
at
municipal
code
9
to
5
4,
wherein
sufficient
parking
exists
and
in
the
and
where
the
introduction
of
permit
parking
will
not
adversely
affect
roadway
capacity,
smoke,
snow
removal
operations
or
Public
Safety
in
our
neighborhood
of
1
27
single
dwelling
homes,
each
of
which
has
their
own
driveways.
We
have
sufficient
parking
available
for
our
residents.
S
Our
residents
have
not
asked
for
permanent
parking,
nor
do
they
require
it.
As
supported
by
the
petition.
Our
neighborhood
submitted
to
councillor
perks
on
September
6th,
the
proposed
policy,
would
exacerbate
permit
parking
program,
inconsistencies
in
the
city
and
within
Toronto
East
York
by
allowing
some
residents
to
exercise
their
democratic
right
to
polling
while
denying
it
for
other
residents
in
June.
This
council
adopted
item
te
7.78
for
councillor
Matt
Lowe's
Ward,
thereby
allowing
the
previous
bylaw
process
to
remain
in
place
to
allow
for
direct
local
consultation
with
residents
of
his
ward.
S
Today,
councillor
Blythe
Bradford
is
making
a
similar
request
that
an
area
of
his
Ward
also
regretting
the
right
to
polling.
It
is
my
understanding
that
at
the
outset,
this
policy
review
was
requested
by
Toronto
is
short
Community
Council
to
reduce
inconsistencies
in
on-street.
Permit
perking
move
it
in
forward.
We
will
have
more
inconsistencies.
Some
residents
will
be
entitled
to
petition
in
polling,
others
won't
summer
streets
will
have
with
driveways
will
have
on
street
parking.
Others
won't
some
words.
Some
parking
zones
will
be
tiny
and
encompass.
Only
handful
streets
and
others
won't
they'll
be
mega
zones.
S
Toronto
transportation
services
is
already
developing
a
citywide
parking
strategy
which
has
been
raised
by
many
of
the
former
speakers.
So
I
asked
you
then
today
in
what
world
do
we
live
and
what
country
are
we
in
where
some
people
have
a
right
to
vote
for
their
for
the
conditions
of
their
neighbourhoods
and
others?
Don't.
S
If
we
take
a
look
at
this
map,
you
can
see,
we
are
five
little
streets.
The
neighborhood
is
bordered
by
a
reverse
ravine
down
to
the
Humber
River.
We've
got
then
two
hills
on
either
side
and
you
can't
get
into
the
neighborhood.
Unless
you
access
these
hills,
three
of
the
five
streets
in
our
area
do
not
have
sidewalks,
so
the
extra
birth
on
the
road
is
required
to
keep
pedestrians
safe.
That
will
disappear.
S
If
you
add
cars
to
the
street,
snow
removal
in
our
area
is
already
maduk
for
our
narrow
streets
and
the
winter
driving
conditions
in
our
neighborhood
are
challenging
because
of
the
steep
hills
on
Humber,
Crest
and
Humber
view
that
feed
into
our
neighborhood
on
November,
19th,
2014
I,
know
if
you
realize,
but
we
had
two
car
accidents
at
either
entrance
to
their
neighborhood,
because
you
have
to
come
down
the
hills
to
get
into
the
it
neighborhood.
There
were
12
car
pilots
pileups
on
either
end
of
it.
S
S
Finally,
the
garbage
collection
would
also
be
rendered
extremely
difficult
for
residents
on
streets
with
tipic.
With
note
with
that
have
no
sidewalks
and
narrow
Lots,
because
when
you
add
the
parked
car
it
would
be
blocking
the
area
where
residents
are
currently
putting
out
their
garbage
so
that
either
be
blocking
their
driveway
or
they'd.
Be
there
where
the
parked
car
should
be
so
our
area.
S
The
former
word
13
is
a
new
part
of
the
councillors
Ward
and,
as
such
substantially,
this
time
has
been
devoted
to
reviewing
our
neighborhoods
needs,
Geographic
suitability
for
on
street
parking
compared
with
other
areas
of
the
city.
Our
concerns
have
been
stated
today
and
previously
stated
to
councillor
perks
through
emails
of
a
petition,
one-on-one
meetings
from
numerous
residents
of
our
neighborhood
and
the
attendance
at
the
Ward
for
consultation
meeting.
Even.
S
A
J
K
J
All
depends
on
how
many
streets
are
being
proposed
to
be
included
in
the
program.
Naturally,
the
original
reports
did
address
that
that
question
so
in
the
original
report,
if
all
the
streets
within
the
Toronto
nistro
district
area
that
are
local
and
in
makeup
which
be
incorporated
to
the
program,
so
they
don't
have
per
hour
parking,
but
we
incorporate
them
yeah.
We
originally
said
it
would
be
a
five-year
phase-in
with
some
additional
resources
being
required.
Okay
and
that,
but
that
again
is
if
we
look
at
all
the
streets,
do
you
have
those
resources
now?
K
J
J
K
F
J
K
You
think
it's
fair
to
do
you
think
it's
fair
to
say
that
if
community
council
went
ahead
and
did
impose
permit
parking
without
without
doing
polls
and
and
and
that
that
happened,
that
there
would
be
a
is
it
reasonable
to
say,
there'd
be
a
large
number
of
people
who
would
be
surprised
by
that
that
they
would
not
have
been
adequately
informed
about
that
change.
I
think.
A
K
K
Consulting
with
our
communities
with
respect
to
impactful
changes
on
their
streets
is
just
a
core
part
of
our
democracy
and
especially
when
it
has
been
baked
into
the
process
for
so
long.
You
know
it's
one
thing
to
say:
okay,
maybe
we
don't
have
polls
on
every
single
thing
we
do,
but
when,
when
the
poll
process
was
already
there
and
then
we
decide,
you
know
what
what
and
how
it
often
has
felt
I
think
on
the
ground
is
that
from
above
at
City
Hall
we're
just
deciding
that
we
are.
K
We
are
wise
and
we,
you
know,
we
know
better
than
them
and
we're
just
going
to
make
a
decision
without
asking
them
directly,
and
if
this
is
a
change
that
they
would
support
through
the
poll
process.
I
think
it's
just
wrong
and
I
just
and
this
is
why
I
move
the
motion
to
receive,
because
because
I
I,
just
I
fundamentally
disagree
with
with
removing
that
right
now.
I
have
heard
some
of
my
colleagues
express
I
think
some
reasonable
concerns
around
the
process
itself
and
the
poll,
and
is
that
the
best
way
to
do
it?
K
And
if
that
is
our
concern,
that
let's
review,
how
we,
how
we
engage
our
community
and
how
we
do
it,
maybe
there
are
better
ways
to
do
it,
and
even
that
can
be
a
discussion
with
our
communities
about
how
how
best
to
ascertain
the
the
will
of
that
street
the
will
of
those
residents
the
will
of
that
community,
but
I
just
I
fundamentally
disagree
with
with
just
saying
we
we've
already
decided
for
you
and
I.
Just
that's
the
wrong
approach.
K
Moreover,
I
think,
given
that
staff
I
mean
staff
haven't
just
not
recommended,
this
I
think
that
our
staff
need
to
be
prepared
for
any
major
changes
that
we
make.
With
respect
to
the
work
that
we
are
not
only
asking
that
we're
demanding
that
they
do
through
a
direction
from
Community
Council,
they
don't
have
the
resources.
This
isn't
something
that
they
have
been
wanting
to
do.
K
They
we
have
remarkably
talented
and
professional
staff,
leading
this
program
and
I
would
want
to
do
far
more
work
if
we
were
gonna
make
any
major
changes
working
in
concert
with
them
to
see
how
they
would
like
to
what
is
their
vision
about
expanding
the
program.
But
to
do
it
in
this
way.
It
doesn't
seem
to
me
like
good
public
policy.
I
want
to
say
just
out
of
respect
to
my
colleagues
as
strongly
as
I
feel
about
my
position.
K
I
know
that
there
are
differing
opinions
that
my
colleagues
feel
very
strongly
about
too
and
I
just
want
to
say
that
for
the
record,
because
I
don't
want
this
to
become
a
you
know,
sort
of
like
you
know,
I'm
right,
you're,
wrong
kind
of
thing,
but
but
I
fundamentally
believe
that
I'm
right
or
us,
they
wouldn't
say
what
I'm
saying
and
and
and
therefore
I
do.
Ask
you
to
support
my
motion
for
receipt
and
if
we
want
to
improve
the
way
that
we
pull
or
engage
the
residents.
K
A
Why
yeah,
if
I,
could
ask
a
question
of
the
mover
just
just
to
make
sure
I'm
I'm
trying
to
sort
through
a
little
procedural
hiccup
here?
Well,
if
you
look
at
their
recommendations
in
the
staff
report,
their
recommendations,
we
have
in
the
recommendations
section
one
into
our
to
receive
at
one
part
of
it
and
to
receive
another
part
of
it
and
I'm
just
wondering,
given
that
that's
what's
there,
what
does
your
motion
accomplish
like
why
I
like
I'm,
just
trying
to
figure
out
are
you?
K
A
Discussed
with
there
enough
I
heard
the
content
of
your
speech
I'm,
trying
to
understand
a
different
question.
So,
yes,
it's
quite
possible
that
members
of
community
council
will
move
some
motions.
My
intention
is
to
move
some
of
the
motions
in
the
body
of
the
report.
I'm
asking
you
a
different
question.
K
K
A
K
A
H
A
H
K
A
So,
to
be
clear
right
to
be
clear,
there
they're
two
possible
two
things
you're
saying
there.
The
first
is:
if
staff
hadn't
made
their
recommendations
they
made
and
you
moved
a
motion
to
receive
your
motion
to
receive
would
be
the
first
in
the
series
of
votes
that
we
did
should
something
else
be
moved
if
I
may
I'm
not
finished.
D
A
Not
identical
to
be
clear,
a
motion
to
receive
does
not
stop
the
debate,
however,
because
the
staff
have
placed
receive
this
and
receive
that,
and
you
are
therefore
effectively
moving
the
staff
recommendations.
Counselors
can
move
amendments
to
the
staff
recommendation
such
as
deleting
those
and
replacing
them
instead.
So
because
the
way
the
staff
worded
this
and
you
can't
effectively
move
a
receipt,
you
can't
have
the
receipt
vote
first,
so.
A
I've
said:
I've
ruled
that
it's
redundant,
because
this
is
the
advice
we
already
have
from
staff,
so
you're
moving
the
staff
recommendations.
Ok,
that's
your
really!
Ok,
good,
ok,
so
good,
we're
all
we're
all
tidy
and
clear.
So
you've
you've
moved
the
staff
recommendations.
Fair
enough.
Ok,
very
good!
Other
speakers,
councillor
Bradford
thanks.
M
B
D
N
B
D
H
H
One
is
number
two
I
know
from
being
here
for
a
while
that
going
back
to
councillor
button
and
then
councillor
McMahon
and
now
councillor
Bradford
the
kind
of
discussions
that
go
on
between
residents
on
one
side
of
the
Scarborough
bore
border.
In
the
end,
the
Toronto
East
York
border,
because
one
side
has
permit
parking
and
the
other
doesn't
yet
Torontonians
are
noticing
that
there's
a
lot
of
freebies
overnight
on
those
streets.
H
That's
the
first
one
and
secondly,
I
sat
here
and
had
many
people
come
forward
to
get
a
pad
parking
because
they
could
not
get
permit
parking
on
their
street,
and
that
is
really
driving
a
lot
of
my
thinking
here.
Someone
who
on
a
street
in
East,
wanted
to
have
permit
pad
she
got
turned
down,
but
because
the
street
didn't
want
permit
parking,
they
had
nowhere
else
to
park.
So
this
is
I'm
not
doing
pad
parking.
H
If
people
need
place
to
park,
the
streets
are
very
convenient,
they're
paid
for
their
paved
already,
and
that
is
apparently
this
motion
has
the
clerk's,
ABS
or
legal,
really
in
a
state,
so
I'm
sure
they're
gonna
try
to
change
something.
But
that's
my
thinking-
and
this
has
gone
on
for
three
years-
I'm-
very
confident
that
everybody
knows
about
this
or
has
heard
about
this
because
there
it
is
been
in
the
newspaper
it
has
been
talked
about.
It
has
been
a
subject
of
a
consultation
which
people
were
thousands
and
thousands
and
thousands
of
flyers
were
dropped.
H
It's
I
can't
make
people
go
to
a
meeting,
but
it
was
really
a
big
issue
for
them.
They
would
be
there
as
we
know,
with
any
housing
meeting
or
anything
else
that
takes
place,
including
the
discussion
today
for
the
project
in
counselor
by
allows
a
ward,
so
hundreds
of
people
are
involved
in
that
so
I
think
it.
We
should
just
proceed
with
this:
I
want
to
make
it
easier
to
have
a
safety
valve
for
people
that
need
a
place
to
put
their
vehicle.
A
H
A
So,
just
just
for
those
who
are
curious,
but
about
the
flurry,
it
was
pointed
out
that
the
police
enforce
permit
parking.
However,
that
doesn't
matter
because
we're
not
asking
for
a
change
in
permit
parking,
we're
asking
for
staff
to
report
on
what
they're
doing
and
certainly
transportation
staff
can
tell
us
what
the
police
are
up
to
well.
H
A
M
Thank
you
very
much
just
to
further
clarify
and
to
help
me
understand.
Are
you
drawing
a
Korell
in
between
property
owners
concerns
and
sometimes
objections
to
front
part?
Sorry
parking
pads
the
desire
to
have
parking
pads
on
the
street
and,
at
the
same
time,
objecting
to
permit
parking
on
the
street?
Are
you
are
you
drawing
a
correlation
between
well.
H
I
think
I
just
would
like
to
know
because
I'm
unclear,
but
having
sat
here
and
had
someone
speak
to
us
and
say
I
can't
park
on
the
street
on
a
little
and
it
wasn't
an
arterial.
It
was
a
local
street
because
it's
up
to
the
rest
of
the
street
to
put
permit
parking
on
the
street.
So
if
I
have
to
make
a
choice,
I
would
like
to
make
that
Street
available
rather
than
people
applying
for
parking
pads
and
being
turned
down
or
paving
front
yards
councillor
and.
M
I
nru
is
is
the
implication
that
that
puts
yourself
as
a
local
councillor
in
in
very
difficult
situation.
When
you
have
a
local
community
that
says
we
don't
want
to
have
front
yard
parking,
but
we
also
don't
want
you
to
put
any
on
street
parking
onto
the
street
because
I'm
taking
care
of
I
have
a
driveway.
That's
correct.
I
have
parking
articles
and.
M
Is
the
intention
to
and
I
recognise
that
the
motion
is
gone,
but
the
intention
is
to
take
a
look
at
everything,
that's
contained
in
Ward
14,
and
is
it
your
hope
that
you're
going
to
reveal
a
pattern
of
applications
and
appeals
around
parking
pad
requests
and
in
correlating
what
is
actually
permitted
on
with
on
street
parking?
Is
that
the
intention
are
you
expecting
to
see
a
trend
here?
Well.
H
I'd
like
to
see
what
it
is
and
how
many
people
have
been
unable
to
get
pad
parking
that
were
also
unable
to
have
street
parking,
because
this
would
actually
fix
their
conundrum
and
my
conundrum
in
bringing
that
in
bringing
that
forward.
Sometimes
they
get
turned
down
just
downstairs
already
and
I.
Don't
think!
That's
really
fair!
Since
the
streets
there
right.
M
And
then
to
to
ask
a
question
about
your
second
portion
of
the
motion
for
streets
that
don't
have
permit
parking,
but
you
may
have
visitors
that
are
staying
overnight
and
in
some
neighborhoods,
where
you
have
these
sort
of
Airbnb
party
houses
and
everyone
is
staying
overnight,
it's
rather
difficult
to
get
parking
enforcement
into
a
particular
residential
neighborhood,
where
you
don't
have
active,
ongoing
parking
enforcement.
Is
that
correct.
H
Yes,
parking
enforcement,
as
you
may
or
may
not
know,
I,
don't
know.
Your
ward
is
directed
primarily
for
permit
parking
areas
because
it's
easy
and
simple
to
drive
up
and
down
those
streets
and
tag
the
cars
without
the
permits
and
as
I
understand
it
there's
very
little
enforcement
on
streets
without
that
I
had
not
thought
about
the
Airbnb
where
a
lot
of
people
descend
on
the
street
plus.
If
you
have
a
visitor,
you
know
we
have
a
permit
parking,
visitor
stipulation.
H
If
you
have
your
mother-in-law,
father-in-law,
sister-in-law,
anybody
coming
into
town
they
can
park
on
that
street
without
worrying
about
a
ticket
they
for
five
dollars,
they
can
have
a
permit
and
I
think
it
just
makes
the
streets
far
more
accessible
for
many
things
and
controllable
by
by
traffic
enforcement.
Thank
you
very
much.
That's
very
helpful.
Thank
you.
K
Sorry
I
kept
looking
for
where
you
were
going
to
move
forward
with
imposing
permanent
parking
and
I
couldn't
find
in
the
item,
so
to
be
very
clear
that
you
are
that
you're
that
you're
supportive
of
receiving
the
report.
But
you
are
you,
these
are
simply
asking
for
information
and
reports.
I.
Think
more
information
asking.
H
A
Have
to
intervene
here
with
a
little
bit
of
procedural
advice
when
we
are
considering
motions
and
the
staff
recommendation
was
to
receive
if
any
motion
passes.
That
motion
then
becomes
the
advice
to
counsel
or
the
direction
to
staff,
and
the
item
is
not
received
if
anything
passes.
The
item
is
not
received.
A
K
N
B
A
A
A
I'd
want
everyone
to
understand,
counselor
the
result
of
councillor
Fletcher's
motion,
because
it
will
also
be
the
result
of
what
I
move
for
my
ward
and
what
councillor
bylaw
intends
to
do.
I
understand
as
well.
So
what
part
Anna
so
I
think
is
also
part
of
the
reason
that
the
report
took
so
long
to
get
to
us.
We
had
originally
anticipated
a
couple
months
ago.
A
A
C
So
I
ask
for
your
support.
I
have
97
percent
of
my
word
that
pays
permit
parking
and
there's
about
three
to
five
percent
that
doesn't
pay
permit
parking.
I
did
have
a
community
consultation
and
I
explained
what
I
thought
was
a
fair
argument
that
you
know
everybody
is
paying
their
taxes
and
being
part
of
the
same
community,
but
also
we
talked
about
some
practical
issues,
so
actually
some
of
the
people
that
lived
on
those
streets
because
there's
only
a
few
of
them
and
they
live
very
close
to
streets
that
have
permit
parking.
C
What
hat
ends
up
happening
is
that
they
don't
have
parking
when
they
come
home,
because
people
that
don't
want
to
pay
for
permit
parking
end
up
all
parking
on
their
streets.
So
I
actually
had
a
number
of
residents
that
lived
on
those
streets
that
were
quite
happy
because
they
said
we
want
to
be
able
to
get
home
and
have
our
permit
parking
that,
because
there
is
only
a
small
number
of
them
and
they're
surrounded
by
streets
that
have
permit
parking.
C
Everybody
that
didn't
have
apartment
parking
ended
up
parking
on
only
those
streets,
and
that
was
causing
some
issues
for
those
for
those
residents,
and
so
there
was
mixed
feelings
but
I
think
by
the
end
of
the
meeting,
everybody
agreed
that
this
was
the
direction
that
we
were
gonna,
go
and
and
and
I
think
reluctantly.
They
supported
this
so
I'll
be
moving
this
into
my
direction.
Also,
understanding
that
you
know
we're
always
looking
for
sources
of
revenue
here
in
the
city
and
obviously
we
can.
A
M
I
apologize
for
this
I
just
need
to
clarify
for
I,
think
counselor
Krusty
for
counselor
Laden
and
myself.
We
would
like
to
proceed
with
recommendation
number
two
in
the
stock
report.
Considering
council
bylaws
motion
specifically
sorry
considering
counselor
by
allows
motion
specifically
references,
Ward,
9
and
councillor
Fletcher's
motion,
specifically
reference
for
14
I,
just
want
to
clarify.
M
M
A
S
M
Thank
you
very
much
and
I
want
to
just
recognize
that
this
is
a
very
complicated
situation
and
when
it
comes
to
parking
on
streets
or
parking
period
or
driving
through
streets
in
a
very
fast
manner
and
there's
always
the
there's,
always
the
there's,
always
the
potential
for
conflict
and
very
stressful
conversations
and
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
recognize
that
to
throughout
the
city.
There's
there's
are
different.
M
There's
a
different
there's,
a
different
tonality
in
every
single
neighborhood,
having
represented
town
right
up
to
Moorpark
and
Summerhill
and
Rosedale,
and
in
a
very
urban
most
densely
most
urban
part
of
the
city.
I
can
tell
you
that
neighbors
from
the
north,
from
neighbors
from
the
south,
they
had
very
different
opinions
on
who
should
be
allowed
on
their
street
and
and
one
of
the
reasons
why,
in
war,
13
I'd
like
to
sort
of
have
an
receive.
The
staff
report
at
this
particular
point
in
time
is
because
most
of
the
downtown
streets
that
I
now
represent.
M
We
have
green
pea
parking.
So
you
are
not
really
going
to
be
able
to
implement
on
street
parking
for
overnight
permit
unless
we
actually
do
something
dramatically
different
with
the
green
pea
parking.
So
that's
our
way
of
sharing
with
everyone
across
the
city
who
comes
into
our
neighborhood,
an
opportunity
to
park
on
the
street
when
you
need
to
so
we
do
a
significant
amount
of
sharing.
We
think
that
it's
a
way
to
to
build
a
vibrant
and
inclusive
commercial
districts.
M
It
also
doesn't
mean
that
we
don't
have
residential
streets
where
they're
low-rises,
townhomes
detached
homes
and-
and
we
still
are
able
to
try
to
make
it
work-
it's
not
easy,
but
to
balance
the
needs
of
the
entire
community,
including
the
interests
of
visitors,
to
our
area,
it
is,
it
is
oftentimes,
extremely
delicate
and
and
for
us
to
to
make
any
significant
changes
right
now.
I
know
that
I
haven't
done.
M
The
done
did
the
the
deeper
work
of
working
with
my
community
to
make
those
changes,
and
even
if
we
had
to
be
quite
honest,
there's
no
way
I'm
pretty
confident
about
this
there's
no
way
we
would
ever
arrive
to
a
consensus.
It
just
would
not
happen
so
if
we
were
to
take
a
look
at
their
streets
and
to
make
sure
that
we
were
able
to
share
them
and
that
there
is
equitable
access
and
that
we're
able
to
provide
people
who
require
accommodations,
especially
those
who
are
living
with
disabilities,
of
some
priority
access,
almost
reads.
M
That
would
probably
be
the
very
best
that
we
can
do.
I
have
new
neighborhoods
such
as
Regent
Park,
which
is
not
technically
new,
but
going
through
a
massive
revitalization
69
acres
of
this
can
has
been
completely
and
will
be
at
some
point
completely
revitalized.
There
is
not
any
permit
parking
on
that
on
those
streets
and
I
believe
that
there
should
be,
but
we're
not
even
able
to
get
to
that
conversation
yet
because
there
needs
to
be
a
lot
of
socializing
of
the
idea.
M
There
needs
to
be
some
education
about
providing
that
to
the
local
community
and
that
that's
work
that
just
has
to
be
done
and
that's
and
that's
important
for
people
to
notice
that
these
conversations
are
not
straightforward.
They're
not
easy,
but
I
also
am
very
confident
that
local
councillors
do
the
very
best
that
they
can
to
try
to
balance
these
diverse
these
diverse
opinions
and
and
needs
and
oftentimes
there.
They
are
blamed
for
everything
and,
to
be
quite
honest,
there
they're
simply
just
doing
their
job
and
and
I
want
to
just
acknowledge
that
as
well.
A
A
As
it
pertains
to
word
for
there,
you
go
see
at
the
end
of
okay,
good
all
right.
Thank
you.
So
it's
a
lively
conversation.
This
has
been
four
years
four
years
of
going
back
and
forth
with
different
approaches
and
a
lot
of
conflict
and
I
wanted
to
speak
to
some
of
the
ideas
that
have
been
presented
here
today.
In
this
conversation,
the
first
is
I
think
it's
very
important
to
remember
that
our
roadway
network
is
a
public
good.
It
is
not
the
property
of
the
people
who
reside
on
a
particular
street.
A
A
Imagine,
for
example,
if
the
property
owners
along
Bloor
decided
that,
because
they
wanted
to
put
a
particular
treatment
on
their
Street,
say
grass
from
curb
to
curb
instantly.
You
have
no
way
of
traveling
along
Bloor.
That
shows
the
absurdity
of
trying
to
imagine
individual
pieces
of
the
public
good,
which
is
the
roadway
network
as
being
the
preserve
of
a
particular
neighborhood.
A
Further
I
would
challenge
the
notion
that,
in
in
allowing
people
on
a
particular
block,
a
polling
right
that
we
are
somehow
being
more
democratic,
these
streets
are
again
the
property
of
the
everyone
who
lives,
resides
in
or
is
visiting
the
City
of
Toronto.
They
are
a
public
good
like
the
air
we
breathe,
like
our
sewer
system,
like
the
lakeshore,
like
the
electricity
system,
like
all
of
the
public
goods
that
are
networks
that
we
all
share
and
we
never
allow.
A
We
never
allow
a
small
group
of
citizens
to
say:
I
am
asserting
a
right
over
that
public
good
for
my
local
benefit,
only
that's
a
that's
a
position,
I've
taken
every
time
this
issue
has
come
and
it's
one
I
will
take
every
time
it
comes
in
the
future.
Public
goods
which
are
shared
networks
must
be
preserved
in
that
way,
and
I
reject
further
the
idea
that
the
polling
system
somehow
is
a
fair
way
of
dealing
with
that.
A
The
people
in
the
City
of
Toronto
elect
a
mayor
and
council
to
manage
those
networks
manage
those
public
goods
and
only
when
Council
feels
like
it
do
we
create
a
bylaw
or
which
says,
go
pull,
but
the
right
to
make
the
decision
whether
or
not
to
pull
rests
with
the
democratically
elected
representatives
who
sit
on
council.
It
is
never
an
automatic
right,
it
is
never
a
democratic
right.
It
is
a
tool
that
some
members
of
council
think
we
should
use
to
better
coordinate
the
input
in
decision-making.
A
It's
no
different
than
a
community
meeting,
it's
no
different
than
going
to
focus
tables
when
we
do
a
development
application,
it's
a
tool
for
helping
us
to
understand
input.
It
has
never
been
the
law
of
the
land
that
any
group
of
citizens
are
able
to
determine
a
piece
of
public
network
or
a
public
good
by
a
popular
referendum
locally.
A
That's
not
what
these
are
so
I
want
to
be
very
clear
and
that's
why
I
have
always
that's
why
I
have
always
fought
to
eliminate
the
polling
provisions
in
our
various
bylaws
I
think
they
create
a
false
expectation
on
the
part
of
the
community.
Just
that
somehow
suggests
that
this
little
piece
of
the
road,
it's
your
right
to
decide
whether
there's
a
speed
bump.
It's
your
right
to
decide
whether
or
not
your
neighbor
has
a
permit
a
parking
pad.
A
A
The
way
an
election
is
finally
on
the
on
the
substantive
issue
of
permit
parking,
one
of
the
pieces
of
due
diligence
that
I
did
when
we
were
considering
ward
for
his
I
and
my
staff
actually
went
out
and
looked
at
all
the
streets
in
question,
and
we
looked
at
them
overnight
during
the
period
when
the
three-hour
parking
rule
is
not
eligible
right
and
guess
what,
in
every
single
instance,
we
found
cars
parked
on
those
streets.
People
are
currently
parking
on
these
streets
in
violation
of
our
parking
rules.
A
It's
a
it's
a
system
of
relating
to
our
citizens,
which
I
reject
utterly
and
in
every
instance
we
could,
if
we
were
interested
simply
in
revenue,
just
start
dating
everyone
with
parking
parking
tickets
more
and
more
and
more,
and
we
could
increase
the
fines
and
it
will
all
be
great,
except
it's
saying
those
people
who
have
the
ability
to
pay
a
parking
fine
and
have
that
not
be
a
meaningful
amount
of
money.
Go
ahead.
That's
your
system,
people
who
have
to
have
trouble
paying
those
fines
too
bad
for
you,
it's
inequitable,
it's
unjust!
A
A
A
Okay,
all
those
in
favor
opposed
that
carries.
Okay
item
is
amended
and
members
be
clear
that
this
means
that
for
Ward,
11,
13
and
10,
we
are
adopting
the
stock
recommendation
to
take
no
action
on
those
wards.
Okay,
all
right.
So
on
the
item
as
amended
all
those
in
favor.
You
want
this
recorded
counselor
cressie
counselor
by
Lao,
councillor,
Fletcher,
counselor,
perks,
counselor,
wong-tam,
counselor
Layton,
all
those
opposed
counselor,
Bradford
counselor
Matt
Lowe.
Thank
you
very
much.
What
else
have
we
got
to
do.
I
D
A
Q
Q
A
D
A
R
J
Thank
you
very
much,
I've
been
desperately
trying
to
get
in
contact
with
the
applicant
for
this,
but
unfortunately,
I've
been
I'm
able
to
today
so
I
have
a
deferral
motion,
but
also
requesting
that
that
staff
just
come
back
with
the
recommendation
on
making
to
loading
making
a
loading
zone
rather
than
the
parking
area.
Okay,
that's
two
clear
options:
all.
E
A
B
A
A
A
J
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
So
I
call
the
meeting
back
to
order
I'm
just
having
a
day
today,
I'm
just
loving
being
the
chair,
I,
can't
think
of
anything
that
would
make
me
happier
boy.
Oh
boy,
I,
like
doing
this.
I
am
going
to
move
to
defer
item
44
to
the
January
meeting
of
Toronto
East
York
Community
Council.
All
those
in
favor
opposed
carried.
Q
A
Consular
by
Lao,
new
business
request
parking
amendment,
Gladstone,
Avenue
and
Shanley
Street,
so
you
move
the
recommendations
in
the
letter:
isin
yep,
okay,
so
all
those
in
favor
of
moving
the
route
of
day
recommendations
in
the
letter
all
opposed
carried
we're
gonna
go
to
74.
For
a
moment
it
is
I,
don't
know
who's
who
wrote
this
letter:
councilor
councillors,
Layton
and
Cressy
new
business
request
for
a
Chinatown
study,
Spadina
Avenue
and
Dundas
Street
West
I
have
a
mover
for
that
councillor
Layton
all
those
in
favor
opposed
Carrie
members,
I
have
a
revised
item.