Morning everybody. I think we're ready to begin. Counselors, if you could take your seat. Everybody could take their seat. That's great. Thank you so much. Good morning, everybody. Before we begin, I just wanted to make mention of the passing of a iconic figure here in North York Community Council and across the city, the passing of uh former counselor uh Howard Moscow. I didn't serve with uh with Howard uh while he was a counselor. I had come through um city hall after he had finished his career, but uh I certainly met him for uh for lunch and and heard many of the stories uh and uh was honored to receive a signed copy uh of his book. He was a a towering figure at at city hall and across the the and across the city uh where he mastered a number of different public policy issues, had tirelessly read uh the agendas uh which constructs several hundred pages and always understood uh what was good and bad for the city and his view. Uh we didn't always agree uh with his perspective, but certainly he was not shy about speaking out. I mean, one thing I can say that uh sometimes when when we leave uh public office, we're forgotten uh immediately uh of the time we served here uh and the contribution we made. But uh over the years that I've been here, Howard Moscow's name keeps coming up both in fun stories and in the constructive contributions uh to to our great city. So, um, the funeral arrangements are for, um, uh, for Thursday at 2 p.m. at Benjamin's Memorial, uh, Chapel, uh, for those those who are interested. But I just wanted to, uh, recognize, uh, his contribution to to our city, uh, to our democracy, uh, never shy, uh, about his opinions, and of course, a sense of humor that's, uh, that's been missed. Uh, if there's anyone else, uh, who wants to speak, oh, we have a couple of people. uh councelor Cole and then uh councelor Carol if you'd like to speak as well. >> Uh yes, I had the uh uh pleasure and the challenge of uh uh sitting on uh Metro Council with Howard for a number of years. We're also uh uh on the TDC together uh and uh he represented the same area I did uh previously. Uh, I mean there's um basically no one like him. I've never in all my years that I've served and I've served with some incredibly talented people over the years. Uh, you know, and he was despite all his hutbah and all his shenanigans. Uh he was a guy who really worked seven days a week all day long on trying to make North York better, trying to help people. Uh trying to essentially uh build uh this city. Uh he u did it also with a a sense of humor. uh he always had some kind of uh humorous vein to something. I think that's how he survived working so hard. Uh and he was extremely creative. Uh I mean he has solved some huge problems uh I know in everything from development applications building housing u uh he uh single-handedly built uh the North York community house which u um services newcomers in North York which is located in Lawrence Heights. Um uh he was an again just a total uh force of nature and again I said the things that he uh did and he always challenged uh you know Mel built you know this place but I think Howard uh gave it its soul and heart. Uh he really did and uh I just cannot say enough about Howard. Even in the last six months he was after me for something that he felt had to be completed in the ward at the Yorkdale station. And here he is sick very sick bothering me. Bo stop bothering me Howard. But anyways the mayor and he had to get this done. We actually got it done. Uh, and Denzel Min Wong is here. He uh certainly knew Howard well and uh he was uh Mel Lassman's uh worst enemy but best friend uh because he really um loved to bait Mel and Mel loved to challenge him and it was an ongoing war between the two of them. But you know the North York Council worked together and got look they built this place you know from the old Dempsey's uh hardware remember that on the corner and look at it now look and that was Howard Moscow that really along with Mel that transformed this place and Chapley and Michael Feldman there was an amazing group of people here in North York uh that built this place and Howard was one of the leading uh conspirators in building North York in some way, shape or form. So, just want to say we sure are going to miss him and there will never be another Howard Moscow. There'll never be another. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Co. Councelor Carol. >> Uh thank you. Uh uh Mr. Chair, uh one of Howard's uh old colleagues is with us this morning, retired counselor uh uh Denzel Minowong is with us. I just wanted to acknowledge that he is here. Um, uh, I reached out to, uh, Denzel right away because, uh, uh, uh, I think of the both of them, uh, Councelor Moscow, uh, knew how to partner with whoever he needed to partner with. Uh, Councilman Wong and Councelor Moscow worked together and council basically, uh, uh, stood down and let them work out together across political divides. they just sort of dropped their political buffs to deal with the taxi issue back in the day. And and that was the way Howard worked. You you work with whoever uh was bothering to be as knowledgeable as you were on the issue. Uh Howard uh came into this room and into city council with his agenda in binders that stacked this high and starting in the days before even post-it notes would take little pieces of paper with little flags and tape them page after page after page. He was the conscience of uh of North York Council and then Toronto Council. Um uh stayed up till 3 in the morning in that little nook underneath his basement stairs. an amazing space to see if if you ever got the chance, and I I did have that chance once, um where uh uh Gloria tucked him away. If you're going to stay up all night, you better get down there and do it. And uh uh he never came to council without knowing every word of every item of the agenda. And so his mischief and his antics um well, Representative John Lewis uh south of the border had a an expression about good trouble. Uh and uh uh Howard made good mischief. If he was making mischief, it was usually to make a point and to give us all pause and make us think about something before we did it. Um and most of what I know I I learned from uh uh watching him work. I honestly say that. Um but he was an incredibly sensitive man. uh uh just by happen stance uh uh joking with someone about growing up in North York. We the conversation kept going and going until I learned that he was my uh older sister's art teacher at Dawn Mill school uh over in in Don Mills Middle. And uh uh I said, "Oh my god, I think you were my teachers my my sister's art teacher." I said, "What's your maiden name?" And and I said, "Baskerville." And he said, "Her name was Susan." This was years ago. He said, "Her name was Susan. She had special needs." And I said, "Yeah, she had to take the elevator. She had a physical disability. I remember her well. Talented. Uh described her art and then said, "Where is she now? I hope she's an artist." And he was a brash brash fella who who uh you thought had uh you know uh nerves of steel. Uh but I said she passed away quite young and I he broke down over a student from 30 years maybe 35 years ago and I thought oh he's actually a pussycat and then I let him teach me most of what I know. Uh he's very much going to be missed. Uh I I think uh most of North York will be uh honoring him on Thursday. Thank you for giving us the time, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you Councelor Carol. And it occurred to me as we enter election season. Um I I ordered my signs through Howard and I'm thinking, well, where do I go now? Any other comments from uh from counselors? Okay. Uh well, good morning everybody. Once again, my name is councelor James Pastnack. I'm chair of North Community Council. We have quorum. Calling meeting 33 to order. Although we're meeting in different locations today, North Community Council would like to acknowledge that the land we are meeting on is the traditional territory of many nations including the Missaga of the Credit, the Yaneshwabi, the Chipawa, Hodenoshi, and Wenda peoples. It's now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit, and Mdayes people. We also acknowledge that Toronto is covered by Treaty 13 with the Missaga of the Credit. Today's meeting is being held by video conference and is being livereamed online at youtube.com/orronto city councsil live. If you're registered to speak at today's meeting, please listen for me to call your name. Call speakers in the order that they appear on the list. The list of speakers can be viewed online by visiting north York Community Council page toronto.ca backcounts, clicking the speakers box for today's meeting. Members, the city clerk has provided all agenda materials. Toronto.ca/counsel and on the clerk's meeting portal, clerk's it are available to members if they need any help. Are there any uh declarations of interest under the municipal conflict of interest act? Don't see any. And may I have a motion to confirm the minutes from our meeting of April 29th, 2026? Councelor Carol. Yes, that uh Oh, it disappeared. Uh uh so moved. All right, that was you got quick on the screen there. Okay, all those in favor posed. Uh that is carried. Okay, let's do a run through of the agenda, uh please identify items to be held. Item 33.1, Francine Drive, traffic calming, speed humps. Uh, councelor Carol. >> Uh, yes. Unless there are any uh late uh speakers registered, I can go ahead and move the staff recommendations. We had a community meeting on this. >> Yeah, I do not have any speakers listed. So, councelor Carol has moved the recommendations. Um, all those in favor? Opposed? Uh, that is carried. uh 33.2 2 7581 Billy Bishop Way official plan amendment zoning bylaw amendment applications an appeal report. I can move staff recommendations. Uh this is an application that is before us. The property owner has gone straight to appeal. Obviously um we ask staff to continue to resolve outstanding issues in advance of any hearing but I'm prepared to um adopt staff recommendations and the directional report for us. All those in favor opposed that is carried. 33.3 Don Mills regeneration uh that is uh held for speakers 33.4 4 235 Wixed Avenue temporary use zoning bylaw amendment decision report approval. Uh councelor Chernos Lynn, I do not see any speakers on the list for this item. >> I'm happy to move staff recommendations. >> Staff recommendations moved on 33.4. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. 33.5. We'll hold that for speakers. That is 22 2673 and 2675 Bay View Avenue. Item 33.6 844 Dawn Mills Road and 1150 Edgington Avenue East block 8 part control exemption application decision report. Uh, councelor councelor Burnside. I don't have any speakers on the item. >> Move recommendations. >> Recommendations moved. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Item 33.7 2600 Dawn Mills Road official plan amendment zoning bylaw amendment appeal report. Uh, councelor Carol, I do not have any speakers listed. >> Nope. And you won't uh move staff recommendations. >> Staff recommendations moved. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. 33.8. I'm going to hold that for speakers. 33.9 uh 17 Holly Hawk Court application for offense exemption. And I do not see any speakers on this item. Councelor Burnside. >> Well, then I guess we'll move recommendations. >> Okay. It's a refusal. All All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. 30 33.10 28 28 Turn Hill Press application for offense exemption. We do have a deputent on the item. Um so we'll hold it down. Councelor Burns your as well. 3311 uh 57 Sun Dial Crescent request for fence exemption. That is also held down for speaker 33.1238 Farm View Crescent request for offense exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. I do have a speaker on that as well. Chapter 13. Sorry, item 13, 63 Bernick Road, application for offense exemption. And I I do have a a uh a deputent speaker on the item. So, we will hold that one as well. Item number 14. We're going to hold that for speakers. 132 Burbank Drive 3315 >> TwoPage Avenue request for offense exemption. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, I don't think there's a speaker registered, but I just I need to look at there. So, if we could just hold that for now. >> Okay. Number 15, Twop Page Avenue is held. No speakers on the item. number 16, uh, 213 Northward Drive, application for offense exemption, councelor Chang. But I do have I'm going to hold that for speakers. Number 17, 117 Glenn Park Avenue. >> Like to move to Burl to the uh July 7th meeting. >> Okay. Uh, we can move deferred. I'm going to alert the two speakers, Richard Goldford and Nicole Curado. Um, just a heads up that this item will not be debated today and it'll be moved to the July meeting. Uh, deferral is on the floor. All those in favor posed. That is carried. Number 18, uh 71 paper birch drive application remove a private tree. Uh that is being held for speakers. Number 19, 172 MC McNickel Avenue. Uh once again that is also held uh for speakers. Item number 20, 125 Lawrence Avenue, also held for speakers. 21 5 Vonda Avenue application to remove a private tree held for speakers. 22 18 and 20 Bentworth Avenue residential demolition application. I do not have any speakers on the item. Councelor Cole move staff recommendation. >> Uh pick your There's three options before you. Could you >> select which one you're moving >> with conditions? Number three. >> Number three. Move with conditions. All those in favor posed. Uh that is carried. 33.2313 and 5 Addington Avenue and 266 268 and 270 Shepard Avenue West. I do not have any deputants on the item. Councelor Chang, >> approve demolition with conditions. >> You're moving uh option three. >> Yes. >> Okay. Option three moved. Approving the demolition with conditions. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Item number 2480 Carl Road, North York. Assumption of services. Uh that is in York Center Ward six. I will um move the staff recommendations. There are no speakers on the item. All those in favor posed. Uh that is carried. Number 25, Holly Hawk Court. Madame New uh Madame Limited Assumption of Services Registered Plan. Uh, councelor councelor Burnside. I have no speakers on the item. Recommendations moved by councelor Burnside. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Item number 26, Metro links Ontario line construction within North York district second quarter 2026 update recommendations. >> I actually have a a speaker on the item. Nicole Curado number 27. Um, Metro Link's Young North Subway Extension, long-term temporary road closures, time extension of the temporary delegation of authority. No speakers on the item. Councelor Chang. No, I do not have speakers on this item. >> Hold the item. Thanks. >> Hold it. 28 Ian Hall Road uh U-Haul prohibition. Sorry, I do apologize. Uturn U-turn provision. I'm I must be thinking of renting something. I've been I've been told to get 30 years of National Geographics out of the house. Um, okay. So, I I one person got that. Um, someone who's read National Geographic. Um, okay. So, I'm going to um move staff recommendations. This is to prohibit a northwest U-turn movement at all times on Ian Hall Road between Victory Drive and a 0.95 meters northwest. All those in favor opposed. Uh that is carried. Number 29, Shaffsbury Street parking amendments. Um I will move uh staff recommendations. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Number 30, Short Street, Fairbank Village Lane, construction staging area time extension. I do not have any speakers on the item. Councelor Cole, >> uh, move staff recommendation. >> Staff recommendations moved. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Item number 31. I do have speakers on the item, so we will hold that down. Item number 32, uh, Erskin Avenue at Red Path Avenue, parking amendments. Um, councelor Chernos Lin, I do not have speakers on the item. >> I'd like to move staff recommendations, please. >> Staff recommendations moved on item 32. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Item number 33. Uh, once again, no speakers listed. Uh seven St. Dennis Drive construction staging area. Councelor Burnside >> move uh recommendations. >> Okay. It's a pretty heavy report here. Okay. Uh recommendations moved on item 33, 7 St. Dennis Drive. All those in favor? Opposed? Uh that is carried. Item number 34, uh, Haven Brook Boulevard and George Henry Boulevard traffic calming speed humps. Um, I do not have any speakers on the item. Councelor Carol. >> Yes, Mr. Chair. I have a motion prepared to defer the item. Had a little email traffic. So, we we need to have a community meeting on this one. >> Okay. Um, so this item is being deferred. Uh, anyone want to speak to the deferral? No. All those in favor opposed. That is carried. Item number 35, Bogurt Avenue, Pon Avenue, Johnson Avenue, Cameron Avenue, Franklin Avenue, traffic calming speed humps. Do not have any speakers on the item. Councelor Chang >> like to hold the item, please. >> Hold the item. Okay. Um, any new items? Do I? >> No. Okay, we're good. So, we're going to go back to the top of the agenda. We're going to go to uh item number three, Dawn Mills regeneration area study final report. Um Alan Mckeler of the Dawn Mills Residence, Inc. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good planning is vital to decision making by council. You have before you an excellent report, outlining how these two properties should be developed. The support that the community will give to these is clear. The challenge for council is to maintain the principles that are part of this report. At one of the community meetings that the planning department held, a number of people from both properties were very clear that the result of the community consultation was often very positive. But when push came to shove, these principles that the planning department had presented and which you had approved were thrown out. I suggest on behalf of the community that the community representatives being the council members voice strong approval for these principles and work very hard to convince their fellow counselors in the rest of the city as well members of provincial parliament to support these principles. for as long as really positive. Mr. Chair, I encourage you support of this report now and forever. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Uh any questions for the deputants? >> Oh, okay. Thank you very much. Uh, next speaker is um Michelle Tiger. >> Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Thank you, chair, members of council. I'm here as a planner on behalf of the owners of 1123 Leslie, which are subject to the official plan amendment 912. I'd like to first take the opportunity to thank city planning and policy staff for the collaborative process so far and to acknowledge the changes made since the last iteration of draft policies released in March. As stated in our letter submitted to you, we are generally supportive of many of the draft policies, but we remain concerned about the policies related to maximum density, road patterns, and park configuration, which we understand are common issues with our neighbors to the south. We have shown an openness with city staff to discuss our client's plans for the site and we would like to further h further those conversations prior to the adoption of the official plan amendment. We believe that ongoing consultation could provide a better understanding of the owner's perspective which may enable further changes to the official plan amendment. Accordingly, we respectfully request that consideration of this matter be delayed until further consultation has taken place. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Any questions for the deputent? No. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Kimberly Sanderson, Kimberly, >> Miss >> Oh, hello. Hello there. Um, thank you for thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Okay. Um hopefully I won't need all the five minutes. Uh good morning counselors. Uh basically my family owns the air rights for the DM Mills area. I believe you have a copy of the letter that we were awarded by uh Kathleen Wyn who at the time was the the premier and then subsequently became the prime minister. Um, we have no problem of progress. Our issue is Don Mills is a historic area. It is the only plan community in Canada and as such we would like to keep the integrity of the area and the heights are part of the integrity. We're willing to allow new buildings and structures, but we're requesting no higher than 12 stories. We've already had other builders in the area that have gone against us and they're subsequently having to pay for it. And we will fight to maintain the heights at as I said no more than 12 stories for the simple fact that the area was planned. It is historic. And for all of those that do not live in the area, you will not understand why it's so important that we keep this the way it is. And I I don't know how to describe it. We have the green space. We have the animals. We have the wildlife. We have the industrial, the commercial, we have the residential, we have semi- detach, we have detach, we have town houses, we have apartments, we have the schools, we have what now is the shops of Dom Mills, which I'm sorry, anybody who lives in the area considers the eyesore because it is taken away from the integrity of the area that was originally planned. I literally if it goes beyond 12 stories, my family will have to enforce a fee that will need to be paid and that can be negotiated, but we're not selling the rights. We'll lease them, but we will not sell them. And for anybody who can't understand that, then you really should come stay in Don Mills for a bit and actually see what the area is. It is an area that incorporates the the young families to the oldest of senior citizens. We do not discriminate, but we do request that the builders work with us instead of against us. >> Thank you. >> Well, thank you for your comments. Um, any questions for the deputants? Councelor Burnside, this is your file. Um, councelor Burnside, this is your this your item. And uh, are there any questions for the deput? Okay, thank you. Okay, we're done with deputants. Questions for staff? Questions for staff? Any questions for staff? speakers. Well, I'm working on a motion, so can we hold it down, please? Okay, we'll hold the item down. Okay, we're moving to item number five, 2673 2675 Bay View Avenue. Um, part control exemption application. We have one speaker, Brandon Le from uh WND Associates. >> Hello. Good morning. Can you hear me? >> Hi. Good morning, chair and members of committee. My name is Brandon Le. I'm a planner at W&D Associates and just appearing uh in support of the staff recommendations and to thank staff for their work on this file. Um the development is now largely constructed and this is a technical item um just to facilitate the final um creation of the condo lots on the site. So thank you very much. Okay, that was concise. Any uh questions for the deputants? No. Okay, I don't have any other uh speakers on this item. Questions for staff speakers? Councelor Chernos Lynn, >> I'd like to move staff recommendations. >> Okay, staff recommendations moved. All those in favor? >> Opposed? Uh, that is carried. I have um item number eight, 112 Del Park Avenue, request for fence exemption, Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. I have uh One speaker on the item. Uh Sarah Ifra online, Miss Ifra. >> Hi, good morning. >> Hi Sarah, thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Um okay, so I did send in a bit of a um blurb slashpresentation. Um my clients understand um you know the fence bylaw. We couldn't meet it by about 10 centimeters in one case. And then on the rear lot line, we're closer. Again, there's a tree on the east side of the property that really shifted um where the pool could go. So, uh we were a little bit constrained. The pool is for therapy as well as exercise. It's a private dwelling. Um, as you can see from the submissions that I made, they have already installed um, in their home a number of protective measures. Um, locks on the windows, dead bolts up high on the on the door, um, combo locks on the fences, e exterior fences, as well as a pool cover that also has a key locking system. So, in terms of safety, I mean, they're the owners of the property and and family members. They're of course concerned with um safety for their own children as well as neighbors and and other people. Now hopefully nobody's climbing any fences to get into their yard to go into their pool. But having said all that, um you know, we respectfully request that you grant the exemption again based on the measures that they've taken as well as some of the constraints on the lot. Um, and you know that honestly we were off by about 10 centimeters or so. >> Okay, thank you for your comments. Any questions for the deputants? >> Okay, thank you very much. Uh, questions for staff. >> Councelor Carol. Yeah, I have a question for Seth uh on this item because it and and the reason I didn't ask this of the de the deputent is because I I'm always frustrated by the way we write the reports on this. It's not clear to me um what what uh uh plans might be made, what we might require. And I I think probably that is a function. It's probably a frustration of the bylaw. Um, but I I don't know if we're talking about um this being met with a Juliet gate or what. I because I only see construction fence and and have the issues of of uh the exterior fence not meeting it, but no clarity on what might be the the fourth wall that encloses it. Do does staff have any knowledge of that? >> Good morning, council. Yes, through you, Mr. Chair. Um they are asking to um put in Juliet style gates along the rear access point of the home in lie of a fourth fence because they wouldn't meet the distance requirement from the enclosure to the swimming pool >> and to so so you were able to have a discussion with them about what height that would have to be that well it while it's not ideal from in terms of staff and the and the bylaw itself um uh you have discussed with them you know the 1.8 8 and etc. that sort of thing and how it has to be bolted in. >> Yes. I believe the intention is if they were permitted to put the Juliet would be 1.2 m >> the minimum height requirement. >> It does not meet the height requirement. >> No, it would be the minimum height requirement. >> Ah okay. But they haven't done it. So, this report, if we were to if we were to um contradict staff uh recommendations and say we're going to approve the pool fence, we don't actually have any documentation that tells us what that would be. >> Correct. The that portion of the um report is proposed. The other fence is um asking for relief as well as it doesn't meet the requirement from distance. >> Right. Okay. Um those are my questions. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I had questions. >> Councelor Cole, >> now the uh applicant uh they have taken some steps, have they not to try and uh meet the bylaw >> through you, chair? Um they have put in a temporary fence right now um that's not permanent. And I believe the deput um suggested that they put in some other measures for security, but those are not permitted within the bylaw currently in terms of like the type of cover and the locks they put on their windows. >> So what what's the main thing they're missing then? >> Yes. So they they would like to put in a Juliet style gate on the rear access point of their home to mitigate access from the dwelling. And then they're asking for relief on the rear fence as it doesn't meet the 1.2 2 meter um requirement from the enclosure to the pool's edge. They're slightly off there by about 40 cmters. >> So what's that? >> Yeah. So perhaps the way we can best deal with it is to uh communicate it would be appropriate to communicate with them, tell them uh the shortcomings and if they could uh make those changes and then uh come back again at a later date. >> So through you chair, I believe it's been communicated to them. I believe they're just seeking um permission to put in Juliet style gates on the rear of their home um in lie of a fourth fence as well as permission to be allowed to be shortly off on the 1.2 meter distance from the rear enclosure to the pool's edge. >> So, is it feasible for them to do this? You think it's feasible? >> The Juliet style gates, yes. Um there's no way really to mitigate the distance from the pool to the enclosure right now because the pool's in and the enclosures in. Those are existing. >> So basically they can do something about the uh Julia style gate but not the fence because of the distance that's there. >> Correct. >> Uh how far off is the uh fence there? >> Uh 0.8 m. I can't hear you. >> Sorry. 0.8 m. So approximately like 40 centimeters. The requirement is 1.2 meters >> and they're at >> 0.8 mters >> which is how far off? >> 40 cm approximately >> the fence 40 cm >> from the to meet that 1.2 distance. >> Yeah. So they're just very a small distance off. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. Okay. So, what if I move that uh we require them to do the Juliet and uh allow the the slight variation on the fence distance? >> That would be up to council's decision, but yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh thank you, councelor Cole. Any other questions for staff? No speakers? Uh you can see uh the applicant here. Uh sometimes I wish the applicant uh would contact the office and I don't think they have uh and we could go do this in advance but they I guess they have their architect and everything and uh but they don't contact the city council. I don't understand but maybe they did. But anyways, then you see they've gone to some effort to try and meet the requirements and I I I think that um uh the reasonable maybe compromise would be that for them to do the uh Juliet uh gate uh up to code and to and the fence it's very minor in nature um and uh can't do anything about that because of the uh the yard uh um size. So that's what I'm going to move then that they adjust the Juliet style gate to requirements to standard. >> So can I ask a question of the mover? The the challenge I'm having in voting for that is this report's not about a Juliet gate. It's about what's what's inefficient now and it doesn't detail what it is they are going to put in. It's it's quite frustrating. So, I'm wondering if you want to defer to or or even stand it down to make sure that we're adopting that is if if you move a motion to adjust the Juliet gate, it's not in this report really. >> I don't know. I don't know what I'm adopting. >> I I would I would make two suggestions. when we either hold the item down or we defer it. >> Yeah. Okay. Let's let's defer it. >> Okay. >> And see if we can work this out. >> Yeah. >> To get more detailed. >> Okay. So, um, councelor Coy, I uh defer to the next scheduled community council meeting. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> So, move. >> All right. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. And I I trust in the interim councelor Cole, you'll get clarity on on what has to be done here to make this legal. Uh item number 10, uh 28 Turnill Crescent. I have uh one deputent on it. Um, uh, Pyen Pojam. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. >> Uh, thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman and councils. When I started building the fence around the house, I consulted with my neighbors. I have two signed testimonies from my neighbor on the right and on the left that I collaborated and made sure that I have their consent about the design and height. I did the same thing with my neighbor on the south side or backyard of my house and he was completely fine with the design at the time. The only issue that he had was he does not have enough privacy meaning the fence is not higher because the land itself is in a slope and the patio would be seeing over his backyard and but I couldn't do anything about the height due to that slope getting the exact height was not possible and I am within two inches of the allowed height tolerance. Therefore, I appreciate if I get uh the exemption granted. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you for your comments. Uh any questions for the deputent? >> No. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um we don't have any other speakers on the item. Uh questions for staff. Speakers. Uh councelor Burnside. This is in your morg. >> Sorry, I had a question >> for staff or for >> Yeah. >> Okay. Question. >> Well, actually of the uh of the applicant. So, sorry, your neighbors are okay with this. >> Yeah. Puan. Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Okay. And a quick question to staff. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Uh questions for staff. Councelor Burnside. >> Hi there. So if I'm understanding correctly, the maximum height is permitted is 2 meters, but at any given point it's between 2.05 and 2.63. Yeah. >> Through you, Mr. Chair. Correct. >> So at most it's like a foot and a half over at the worst point. At the other point, it's kind of in line. >> Correct. >> And the grading is is variable and creates an issue. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Like to move uh that we uh grant the exemption. >> Okay. Uh, councelor Burnside is uh granting the fence exemption for 28 Turn Hill Crescent. There's a motion to put it on the screen. It'll appear shortly, but we can vote on it now. All those in favor? Opposed? Uh, that is carried. Next item uh 57 Sundial Crescent request for fence exemption Toronto min code chapter 447. I do have one speaker on the item. Aina Gelmanova. Aa Jel Manova. No. Okay. We can't seem to find her. Um, we'll bring it into uh committee. Are there questions for staff? This is Sundo. We haven't I I don't the speaker is not here or not available or do you want to continue to debate the item or we don't want to defer too many items or then our next meeting will be you're going to move staff recommendations. Okay. Staff recommendations moved. All those in favor? Opposed. Uh that is carried. Item number 12 38 Farm View Crescent request for fence exemption. I have one speaker on the item. Bahan Aaman. Bhan Aha mine. >> Oh, great. Thank you very much for coming. >> Uh, good morning. Thank you. And, uh, good morning members of the North York Community Council. Uh, my name is Vahana Jamian. My wife, two daughters, and I have lived in Henry Farm since 2013. We love our neighborhood and plan to be in our house for decades to come. After years of planning and finding contractors, in 2023, we transformed our backyard and installed a new inground swimming pool. We have always bent over backwards to ensure compliance with all the regulations. For example, before we even started construction while still in the planning phase, we reached out to the city for guidance. This included inviting the city bylaw inspector to our property to go over our plans beforehand, incorporating his feedback, and having him visit the property during construction and after construction to make sure everything was compliant. As required, we upgraded the inadequate fences all around the property to the proper height, installed the necessary gates, made sure they're non-climbable, self-closing, etc. The only exemption from the bylaws we're seeking is to install Juliet gates for the two walkout doors we have in our basement towards the backyard in lie of building a 60-oot fence across the entirety of our property between the house and the pool. A full fence would require us to make a very meaningful, in our view, frankly unnecessary expense on top of the small fortune already spent renovating the whole backyard and it would ruin the entire flow, functionality, and aesthetics of the property. I want to stress that safety is our paramount concern and we believe our proposed solution gets us effectively to the same place in terms of safety without artificially dividing the property from one end to the other. I note that the proposed Juliet gates are the same requirements as a fence in terms of height, being self-locking, non-climbable, and I see the added benefit of potentially appearing as bars and detering thieves from breaking in as our neighborhood is unfortunately experiencing an epidemic of break-ins, usually by thieves breaking glass doors in the back of the house. In terms of other safety mitigating measures, I note the room with the sliding walkout door is effectively empty and the room with the standard swinging door consists of storage closets with neither room having anything climbable to the outside. Additionally, we've installed two cameras in the backyard which face the pool so we can monitor it at all times from our phones and on the TV in our home office and the family room. I would note while waiting for the two years waiting for this hearing, we had closed access to both walkouts from the basement in an effort to bend over backwards regarding safety, even with a temporary reduction in our ability to fully enjoy the property. We were also instructed by city staff that the proper etiquette was not to go ahead and install the Juliet gates prior to getting the exemption. So, we didn't. Uh the evening before submitting the application for defense exemption, I walked around just to see who happened to be home at that time. And I received letters of support for a requested exemption from three neighbors whose backyards directly touch ours and two others on our street. Again, we've been proactive in securing guidance from the city in implementing all safety measures. With this proposed solution, there will be no access points from the house that deviate from the primary safety requirements of the bylaw regarding minimum height being self-locking and non-climbable. We believe our proposal meets the intent of city of safety requirements and controls access to the backyard at the exact location where risk might occur rather than across the entire yard. We believe the exemption we're requesting today is a very reasonable one which is targeted, safe, and a less intrusive solution. We note the council has approved similar exemption requests in the past, and we have the support of many of our neighbors. With your support, I look forward to finally closing the chapter on our renovation project. Thank you very much for your consideration. >> Thank you for your comments. Um, any questions for the deputants? >> Yes. Uh, yes, >> councelor Carol. Uh, Vahan, thanks uh so much for coming today. Um, so uh uh and thank you for uh allowing me to come and visit on site uh to have a look at this because as you know I I I worry about Juliet gate staff probably told you. Um one of the issues here is uh is that the gate you are planning on installing is at the minimum height. I understand you've had a look and you're willing to to uh install the maximum height that is preferable. >> Correct. Yeah. Yeah. And there's and there's there's sufficient structure to the wall uh that we can solidly bolt that so it's outside. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. Okay. I really appreciate that. Thank you. I'll I'll have a motion on this. Uh Mr. Speaker. >> Okay. Thank you. Um thank you, Deputy. Thank you, Councelor Carol. Any other questions? No. Questions for staff? >> Speakers? >> Uh yes, >> Councelor Carol. >> Yes. Uh thanks. Uh uh Mr. Chair uh I did uh submit a motion on this um as you know this is rare for me u but I'm I'm allowing this um because really this went the the way it should go. Uh the uh the resident got a lot of great advice uh from uh uh MLS and while while we would prefer the outside enclosure uh a lot of work had been done by that point. Um but he did work with staff uh did work with council office. Uh staff said you should probably talk to your local counselor especially because your local counselor's uh concerns around pool fencing. And so he allowed us to make a site visit so that I could be assured of how solidly it is possible to install in this case. It's a really deep uh uh amount of uh masonry to to do the uh installation into. And the resident has agreed to move to the maximum height per Juliet fence. And the other thing that I look for when I go looking for Juliet gates is okay, where exactly is it? Is there a way to pry it open and then tie it off somewhere so it's just never closed? There isn't. In this case, uh, it's sufficiently far enough away from edge fencing or or other structure in the house that once you install the spring-loaded Juliet gate, it will be closed. You will have to open it to get through it. Um, and so, uh, I'm moving the following motion and and thank the, uh, resident for working with staff and working with my office. >> Okay. Thank you, uh, Councelor Carol. Any other speakers on the item? Any questions for the mover? Okay. Okay, the motion is uh on the screen. Uh all those in favor opposed. Uh that is carried. Item number 13 63 Bernick Bernick Road application for offense exemption. I have one speaker on the item. Zenid subata. Subota. Great. Thank you very much for coming. You have five minutes. >> Good morning everyone. Unfortunately, this is my first time speaking publicly. I'm extremely nervous. I apologize in advance. My name is Zin Sabota and I'm an owner of 63 Bernick. This is my first house I owned and I got to build. I'm very excited to enjoy it and this is not wasn't an easy process. I did my best to comply with all the bylaws that I could. On May 21st, 2025, I was issued a pool enclosure. I was a uh and that week, my contractor and I did pre-insspection on of the site with Inspector Charlene Tate, and we went through everything to make sure everything was okay to start excavation. Once it was dug out, we called the inspector assigned again to go back to go through any deficiencies in the enclosure. We have successfully complied with all the violations but one being discussed today. 1.3E1A rear yard swimming pool enclosure including gate is closer than 1.2 m from the inside of the enclosure namely hot tub. May I suggest that the hot tub is actually not as deep as a pool is only the seat itself is only 23 in deep. Creating that space is actually not as dangerous as man may suggest, but creating the only 25 inches instead of four feet that are required by law because we we weren't able to meet that because this fence was installed afterward and asked um by our inspector to be installed afterwards. It wasn't in suggested in the initial permit. We weren't able to comply with the distances. So basically where we've been left was with was where the fence is from the ent exit from the house that we created four feet away now left with only hot tub where it's 56 in um from the distance that is being obstructed with only 25 in clearance. May I suggest that that this is enough u passage to pass because the the pool and the backyard is accessible and it is not primary space. It is secondary space to the house and it's fully enclosed to the public and all the uh possible people who can access it. Um I kindly ask you to grant me this simple to grant me this to a simple house owner who is not as familiar as all the bylaws and was doing my best to comply. This exemption is only a minor variance and does not interfere with public safety and is easily possible for even some some of the wheelchairs. I have also spoken to most of my neighbors and the owners who excluding the houses are current tenanted and have not found any neighbors that are objected to such passage size and a contrary signed a letter saying that they would want the city to grant me this exemption at this time. Granting me this exemption will avoid of the smelling of the pool of the winter including all the rain and of getting and a dangerous expensive excavation to the gas line that one should not endure to the strict municipal while it not being clear prior to excavation to the house owner by because I was able to I reached out to the city many times I tried to comply as many things but it is very hard to get immediate answers out of the city and inspectors Unfortunately, I can show you a trail of emails that I've written and I have not received replies back. I try and I'm willing to comply at any alternative conditions you guys can propose, but at this time we have already constructed all the enclosures and we have a clearance of 25 in. And I kindly ask you to please grant me so I can go ahead and start the pool and not create a smelling process for all my neighbors and create a clean existing environment for everyone around us. Thank you. >> Thank you for your comments. Any questions for the deputants? >> Yeah. Uh just a question. So, one of the things that that staff are taking issue with here is that the uh the fence posts are not embedded in cement like they would have to be dug through the patio stones and then >> stone through the patio stones with six inch nails. >> Right. And but they prefer it to actually be embedded in cement to being bolted in whatever the size of >> one of my violations. I have not received such violation >> and and and that was not clear to you that that wasn't there for >> I can show you a list of my violations and it is not clear to me here and the list of the violations I have complied fully with all the violations except I don't have enough distance. >> Right. May I suggest that the actual width of the property is only 25 ft and the pool is already only 10 ft wide. So I am minimal. So if design were to change even to close it off, I would block off the staircase. I would block it literally wouldn't comply and I have a school at the back, I would really wouldn't want to put it in a realign of the school. >> Right. Right. Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Uh just just some for clarity sake, you mentioned a hot tub. Um the hot tub is actually a join to the pool, isn't it? >> Yes, it is. It runs on the same gas line, >> right? And and is the are they requesting a when it comes to the hot tub, I see pictures here of a measurement? >> Yes, because what it is that one I'm not complying with is a swimming pool enclosure including any gate is closer than 1.2 2 m horizontally to the water age namely hot tub enclosure is 1.2 m which is right now it's only 25 in what you're seeing is a measurement of what is actually there and I'm required by law to have four feet which I'm half just over half >> I'm I'm sorry the um what you've got is how much >> I have 25 in inch clearance >> and what are they asking for >> 4T 1.2 2 meters is equivalent to 4 feet. >> 48 in. >> They're asking for 48. I see. So, um that means moving this fence basically right against right against the house. >> Right now against from the house I have four feet. I have I comply with everything except for the clearance from just that hot tub. And a hot tub is only so hot tub itself is 70 in in length. The one the part that's being obstructed is only uh I believe sorry um 56 in is the part that is actually being that's a clearance is created basically a hallway of 56x 25 in in one passage and this is a secondary space. me every I I just want to understand this if if you comply with this this fence this chain link fence will be right against your house right you'll have you have >> means I don't comply with with fence I wouldn't comply with with the fence um against the house >> okay I think I've got it now this is a mess okay any other questions for the deputy no okay questions for staff Councelor Carol. >> Uh, yes. I I'm trying to understand how we find ourselves in this in this situation because it looks like there was early communication here. Otherwise, we'd be, you know, we'd be having a conversation about Juliet Gate. Um, so at some point in the contractor process or building process, they came to get information, knew they had to do a fence, and uh, and I'm just wondering, is there any conversation? Do you get the opportunity to have a conversation at the architectural phase, at the design phase to say, "Hey, this hot tub is just a little too close. We're there's no way we're going to be able to meet this." Uh, is there an opportunity earlier in the process that we can make clear what it is we need >> through you, Mr. Chair? Yes, there is an opportunity. Um, I can't specifically speak to this particular case as I wasn't involved at that point. Yeah. >> Um, but there is definitely an opportunity. We do engage early on in the process. So, the ones that are showing up here are just the ones where somehow that didn't quite follow through. Um, can I assume that there are good cases that aren't even making it to the community council because there's early communication and the enclosure is met when I visit a backyard and the fence is exactly as I would like it. That's because we we got in early and we we made clear to the architect what they ought to be designing. >> Correct. Either the architect or the property owner. But we generally do um attend >> initially and have a discussion um and it does go through a whole permit review process on what they um intend to put in >> um with respect to an enclosure that gets reviewed by staff and then followed by site inspections through the process. >> Okay. And and last question, um I'm trying to tell from the photographs, if this if this pool uh was not uh um if the if the the the distance to the that that section of the pool, the hot tub section of the pool, if that distance was not uh deficient, um would staff be recommending this pool. Pence, >> it does mean uh through you, Mr. Chair. does meet the requirement to enclose the areas that have access from the dwelling unit. Um you have to be one meter away from those. So that's why she's one meter out and one meter to either side. >> Um if she were to try now to comply with it to bring in the um permitted distance, >> she would then >> fall into not complying with that side. That makes >> So this is the only deficiency that unfortunately the fix would create another deficiency. Correct. >> I see. I see. Thank you. That's very helpful. Thank you. Thanks, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Carol. Um, just so I understand this, um, if the fence was moved uh, if the hot tub was moved uh, 23 in further from the fence, this would all comply. The fence is the chain link is fine, the gate's fine. It's that distance. >> Yes, it's the distance um, from the pool enclosure. the the chain link fence to the edge of the hot tub. >> Right. So, if that hot tub So, if if they comply, they're going to not going to move this hot tub. Uh that's for sure. It's not a portable device. It's built in. Um this chain link fence would be right against the house. >> Yes. Which would not comply with the um enclosure um the permitted enclosure for uh using the wall of your home. >> Right. So, it would violate another correct bylaw. So there's no easy way out here. >> No. >> Have you pre presented some solutions to the to the homeowner, >> Julian Gates or? >> Well, to to um Carol Shel's point, it does we did have communication with with them. I'm just not too sure to what extent as I wasn't involved at that time. Um but it would have been discussed on site potential ways to go around having to use that style gate. There are many different style options, >> right? Well, there's three sets of doors there if they had Julian gates at at all three sets. Would that comply? >> Well, they would probably be here asking for um permission to use the Juliet style gates as it's not a permitted enclosure >> currently in the bylaw. >> All right. Um any other questions for staff? No. Um speakers on the item? Um what's the plan here? >> Uh yes, uh Mr. Chair, I apologize to uh Mr. Green because I have not prepared a motion in writing, but I'm going to move approval of the fence as pictured in the report. Um, this is this is a frustrating one because we're I think we're in a new world now where um homeowners are actually trying to comply and um there's still a disconnect between what architects and contractors should know darn well by now and actually be incorporating in their design and helping out homeowners and homeowners then after the fact trying to mitigate and and and make efforts. I actually prefer this type of uh uh enclosure to Juliet Gates. Much prefer it. Um you know, I've been to homes where this is done with glass and incorporated in the patio design and it all works very well. Um there's one deficiency here and it's only in one section. It's not the entire length of the enclosure. It's in one section uh near the gate. Um, but uh uh it is a serious gate and constructed as per the bylaw. And so I'm going to move approval of the fence as it appears in this report. Um uh because of the the the efforts that were made by the home order to try and comply. >> Councelor Ba, you want to speak? >> Yes. No, I I uh thank you counselor Carol. Um I will be supporting uh your recommendation. Uh so uh we're moving approval granting the application. >> I just uh >> Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. Uh councelor Cole, >> I just want to commend the owner of 63 uh Bernick Road uh for her first time. You were very passionate, very articulate, and uh very reasonable. So continue to do your public speaking. You're very good. Thank you. >> Hopefully she doesn't have to come here very often. Uh yeah, I know she probably not uh prefer not to be here. Okay, so uh the motion was on the screen. It is now gone. There it is. Okay, all those in favor posed. Uh that is carried. Item number item number 14. Item number 14. I have uh one speaker on the item. I have a David Worth. Uh David. >> Yes. Hello. Can you hear me? >> Okay. Yes, we can. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Thank you, chair, and good morning to the council members and thank you for the opportunity today to discuss the application for the pool enclosure fence exemption. As background, uh, our backyard is completely enclosed by six foot high fencing, uh, in accordance with code, including two gates, uh, which are secured by four cylinder combination block, uh, locks mounted at least 1.5 meters above ground. Uh, we have two back doors, uh, one of which comes off our kitchen and family room area and another from a basement walk out. If I could draw your attention to the drawing of the proposed enclosures, we're proposing an exemption in order to place a glass gate just uh outside these doors secured to the exterior walls and flooring. Uh one of which is a concrete slab, the other of which is um a deck structure which includes the the actual um the big braces underneath um and will be uh secured to the exterior wall. Uh this would provide the same protection as that outlined by the city bylaws as there's no other way to access the pool. The height of the glass would be in accordance with that outline for other fence protections for the pool by the city bylaws as 1.2 m. Um for further information that the residents of the house are only my wife, my mother-in-law, and myself. Uh I believe this meets the intent of the bylaws by preventing unwanted or accidental uh access to the pool. Um it is unfortunate when the bylaw officer Sandu came by recently he did not have access to this application so we could not discuss uh it on the premises and and get his feedback. Um he does note that there is a bench located near the back door on the deck. Uh but I would note that it is 2 feet away at a diagonal is outside the proposed glass barrier. So climbing it would mean somebody wanted to get into the house, which unfortunately we recently had a break and enter through that back door. Um, but it doesn't help anybody from getting from inside the house uh to access to the pool. Otherwise, they'd have to jump a 4ft glass panel from inside the house onto a bench 2 feet away, which I'm not sure that would be very helpful. Um so um if you're in agreement uh we would like to to request uh kindly this uh exemption to the pool enclosure. >> Okay. Thank you for your comments. Um any questions for the deputent? No. Okay. Thank you for your comments. We'll take it into committee. Questions for staff? >> Uh yes I do have questions for staff. >> Councelor Carol. Uh uh just quickly uh the the the deputed uh uh uh uh describes the uh the bench as not being accessible from inside the house, but I'm confused about that. Is that is that French door from the house is that uh additionally closed off in any way or is it just your garden variety French door? So through you chair, um I believe it does form part of the enclosure. The bench is in the inside of the enclosure that encloses the main walkout. >> So it would facilitate climbing. >> Yeah. Yeah. Okay. >> And then he's asking for relief um to install Juliet style glass panels, I believe, from the walk out from the basement. >> Yes. And I'm not clear about those. Um, I guess that's a recent proposal because they're they're not noted in the report. Would they be installed to the doors or to the at the top of the stairs? >> I believe to the doors. >> Okay. Um, and and are the if that was the case then the railings which look kind of short that that run along the basement enclosure, they're immaterial to this. They don't form any part of an enclosure. >> No. If he was permitted to put the enclosure Juliet style flush against the doors, it would eliminate the stairs and and the uh railings. >> Okay. Um uh thank you. Um uh I think that's all I need for now. >> Thank you. Uh thank you, Council Carroll. Um any other questions for staff? I mean the >> seeing none uh uh Mr. Chair, I'm going to move a deferral of this. The the applicant did not reach out to my office and did not invite us for a site visit. And so I I'm not convinced that the accommodation that he mentions today um actually uh give us all of the uh the safety measures that we require here. I it's going to need a site visit and I I'm going to uh uh commit to do it myself if if he would be willing to have us on the site. I I don't know because he hasn't contacted my office earlier which is always my preference. U I think that's a good idea because I'll defer for now. >> There's a long list of deficiencies here. >> That's correct. >> And so it's not a simple fix. >> I want you to have no concerns by the time I bring it back. >> I am I am going to lose sleep over this one. I assure you. Okay. So, we're going to defer to July. Of course, the um the price we pay for deferring all these items is July is a long meeting. So, um back bag bag up your lunch and all those in favor. That is carried. Item number 15, uh two Page Avenue fence exemption. I don't I don't have speakers on the item. >> Councelor Councelor Carol uh questions for staff. >> Uh no, I don't have questions uh for staff. Um I am going to again move uh uh deferral to the next uh um to the next agenda. And on this one, it it's really just work I need to do, I think, with staff before uh before coming back to uh to to the uh the July council. Hopefully, it will be quick then. Uh just just briefly, Mr. Chair, this fence, which was long discussed, is actually a mitigation measure based on a design that that was originally in the original design meant to happen at the sideyard of this house. Um we have been working to accommodate on this site uh for years now and and the reason for this fence in the front yard was to to uh uh accommodate planning's requirements not to damage trees etc to move the drive around to the sideyard. Long story uh but I think uh we need to meet because they uh they actually did do some work mid fence on the height. They did some work on being able to see through the gates and and still we find it back here. So I I need some work with staff and and a communication with the homeowner. Thank you. >> Okay. So you're moving deferral. Okay. Um item number 15 deferred. All those in favor? Opposed? Uh that is carried. Item number 16. I have one speaker on the item. Madra Alli. Mid alive. >> Yes. >> Great. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Good morning, member of council. Uh sorry about my voice. Um thank you for the opportunity to speak today regarding uh my fension or height at 2.3 Northwood Drive. Uh first of all uh regarding the wood fence height exemption uh I just uh I submitted a consent letter from my all three neighbors who share the fence with me neighbor at the west side neighbor at the east side and the neighbor at the south side and uh they had a written consent supporting the existing fence height. Uh the fence height uh was intended to match the previous fence height at the side side of my property. Uh the existing uh fence height was the at the same level. So I just uh built a new one in front of it and uh as you see in the photos in the I believe they are in the file. So uh as from the side south side we go to the uh front of the house I gradually the height of the fence increase it to the required standard 2 m and uh sorry the additional height was the uh also helps to improve security reduce the visibility into the backyard and protect my service dog and pets from wildlife wildlife uh such as raccoons and other animals. There have been no complaints or safety issues related to to the bedside height. Uh the second one is uh regarding the uh chain link fence uh mesh opening side uh which uh when I wanted to install the chain link fence I purchased the fence material as one and a half inch mess product and uh uh I have the photos uh of the product tag uh and uh shows that exactly is one and a half inch that is required. Uh however after installation and intention of the uh chain link fence some openings measured slightly larger like uh approximately between 1 and 58 in or 1 and 3/4 in. So that was not an intentional violation uh but uh rather than the result of the installation process. I respectfully ask council to consider neighbors support uh the good faith of effort to comply with the requirements and uh the absent of any negative impact or safety concerns. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. >> I have a question. Um sorry, thank you. Just um wanted to confirm. So you have the support of your neighbors who are bordering you with the height exemption. Is that correct? >> Yes, I do have the letter. I submitted the letter. >> Great. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Thank you. Those are all my questions. >> Thank you very much. Any other questions for the deputent? No. Okay. Thank you very much for your comments. Um questions for staff. >> Um councelor Chang. So um other than the height exemption with regard to the pool fence, the challenge that is highlighted here is the size of the hole of the chain link. Is that correct >> through you Mr. Chair? Yes, that is correct. >> And so what is the difference between what is allowable and what has been built? So the permitted um allowable is 38 millimeters >> which is how many inches does anyone can anyone and a half inches >> 1.5 in and what >> and he's at 1 and 34s. >> Okay, that those are all my questions. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Chang. Any other questions for the deputent? No. Um speakers, councelor Chang, what's the plan here? >> I would like to move to grant the exemptions that are requested. I feel that uh a good effort has been made and the gap is you know minimal in terms of the the size of the chain link fence and I think the applicant has also made the effort to get his neighbors to uh agree to his height exemption. So, I support the exemptions requested. So, we need to hold it down to drop the motion. Okay. >> Yes. Okay. Thank you, councelor Chang. We're going to hold this item down. Uh when we come back, the motion will be before us. Item number 17 is um 117 Glenn Park Avenue. Application remove a city tree. Uh Richard Goldford. Oh, I'm sorry. No. >> Yeah. Sorry. Uh number 18, 71 uh Papa Birch Drive. Application to remove a private tree. I have two speakers. Um Brian Shin. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Shin. You have five minutes. >> Morning, council. Um, uh, I just want to start off by giving you a bit of a backdrop as to why I stand before you today. Uh, my mother is 86 years old, the owner of the property, and has lived at the property for over 45 years. She was displaced from this home for more than a year due to extensive damage caused by a storm. It was a a significant insurance claim where the entire home had to be gutted. She was only able to move back into the home approxim approximately nine months ago. It was actually an insurance adjuster on more than one occasion that raised a concern about this particular tree and suggested that this tree be addressed uh as soon as possible as it was leaning dangerously close to the house. We had two arborists visit the property to examine the tree. Both agreed that the tree needed to be removed. It was their professional opinion that the tree is a safety concern, but it required a permit. The arb the arborist uh we agreed to use provided a full arborous report. Um the arborist felt that this was a no-brainer and a permit would be easily approved as there was evidence of heaving. Partly to blame is that the uh the tree wasn't planted in the correct spot and it was being pushed over by a neighboring more mature basswood uh tree which is city-owned. Needless to say, we were all quite shocked and confused when the permit was denied, especially the arborist. Um needless to say, this tree is a liability and a safety concern simply because of the way this tree is leaning. In the event that this tree falls, it will only be going in one direction that would land directly on top of the home. However, more importantly, um, severely injure somebody inside. Any form of inclement weather is extremely worrisome because of the way this tree sways. This tree is causing a lot of anxiety for my mother and the entire family and uh, and brings back a lot of trauma experiencing uh, from 2024. I hope that the initial decision can be uh reconsidered and overturned and the permit be allowed. Uh I'm not sure if any of the council members had access to the arburous report, but I do have some copies that illustrate the pictures of what the tree looks like. >> Okay. Uh that's it. >> Thank you. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Are there any questions for the deputants? I >> uh councelor Chernosen >> I just wondered if we could get those because we can't I think this came to us before if I recall correctly and so we must have seen the arburous report at that point but I can't seem to get to it from um the clerk's portal at the moment. So I'm just wondering if we could get those copies just to take a quick peek. >> Um >> are you saying you can't Oh >> and thank you for providing that. >> Well, he can't have Where's the clerk? >> I I think it was on the original report when this first came to us maybe, but it just isn't linked in this. >> We never get this >> sometimes. Is that an online Is that an online attachment? Are we asking Can we ask questions at some point? >> Yeah. Okay. The deput is still there. Are there any other questions for the deputy? >> Quick question. Sorry. Your mom moved out of the uh the house for Sorry, what was that for again? Uh uh storm damage actually uh >> from something else. >> Yeah, from something else. The the roof was basically ripped off and it flooded the entire home. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. And the house was redone. You're not >> The house is completely redone top to bottom. >> Yeah, it was no additions, nothing like that. >> Nothing like that. >> Yeah. Okay. Refurbish. Okay. Thanks. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you for your comments in your handout. Question for staff. >> Yeah, I do. >> Uh councelor Burnside. So these um blue it's a blue spruce, right? Soft wood. Yeah. >> So are they more susceptible to uh damage in wind storms or less so than a hardwood? >> Through the chair, I wouldn't say that they're more or less uh there's so much variation across individual trees in terms of their condition and their size and their maintenance that that swamps any kind of difference between those two types of trees in general. Okay. Um, so if we granted uh the approval to take this tree down, what do they have to plant? Three >> through the chair. Our alternate recommendation, which is embedded in the staff report, recommends five replacement trees uh as a combination of cash and loo and on-site. >> So there's an alternate recommendation. Okay. Yes. Um, and what's the lean on this in terms of degree? Because the the the the picture that we have in the staff report is not bad, but when I if you look at the different angle, that's got to be >> about well, I'd say at least 20° >> through the chair. We don't measure the actual angle. I don't believe that the private arborist has either in this instance. Uh as as an arborist with many years of experience, I would say that this is somewhere around 10 degrees out of vertical. That number is often people are often surprised as you are by that by that number. But bear in mind we're you know the ground is zero and plum or vertical is 90. The other thing to consider in this instance is and and our staff report addresses this somewhat is the vertical part of the tree the upright part of the tree. The top of the tree has returned to vertical and that reflects that many years ago the tree either was planted at an angle or tipped over. the root system restabilized and the tree grew straight from that point onwards. Uh so one of the things that we look at when we're assessing this is is that restoration to vertical as an indication of how long a whether the tree has restabilized and how long ago that was. >> Okay. But if you're not an expert, okay, like you are, and I'm definitely not, and I think if you're like 90 years old, and I know we don't base bylaws on the age of people, but would you necessarily be comfortable living beside this tree that's however many feet from your house tipped like that? >> Through the chair, we tried really hard to avoid putting ourselves in that situation. >> You don't have to. You don't have to answer that. That's that's fine. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Burnside. Any other questions for staff? >> No. >> No, but I'm going to move the alternate recommendation. >> Okay. Well, we'll get to speakers in a second. Thank you, Councelor Burnside. Uh, any other questions? No. Councelor Burnside? >> Yeah, I'm going to uh move the recommendation to uh approve the removal of the tree. I mean, we have bylaws are bylaws, but there needs to be some flexibility and um some understanding of a situation. And if you look at this tree, I guarantee you I would not want to live near that tree. Whether I'm right, wrong, or otherwise, um I think given that there is a policy to replace with other trees and hopefully they can uh plant it straight, um then uh I think that's I think that's the prudent way to go. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, councelor Burnside. It is um clearly the uh the leaning tree of uh Pab Birch Drive. Maybe it'll be a famous touristite site one one day. Any other speakers on the item? No. Okay. Uh so councelor Bernstein is moved to approve the request to permit the removal of the uh privately owned tree. All those in favor posed. Uh that is carried. Thank you very much. Um, okay. At number 19, 172 McNickel Avenue. And uh I have a deputent uh Nicole Curado. >> And I actually was supposed to depute on the item before as well. and and >> but uh yeah, I I was going to this is the item 19 >> and I was supposed to one before I was supposed to on both >> but uh >> um well that item's been dealt with. So why don't we why don't we do item number 19. >> Uh so you can speak to 172 McNickel. >> Yeah. Uh the the what I was going to say again it this is a again a very strong healthy tree. Again it's very sad that you just approved the cutting of of this other tree that that was healthy because these these trees especially like these spruce trees that they're very very strong. Grew up with one in the backyard and yes they do lean. They do look like they're they could fall but they they don't. They're they're quite healthy and uh yeah, the trees do lean and then they do sometimes, you know, look like they they could fall, but they they don't they because the roots are very very strong and and because the shape because they're cone shaped, they actually they actually are very stable. They're they're quite stable shapes. So they're very stable trees and they generally they don't they don't dig into the foundation either. They so yeah I think if if the city arborists don't cut the tree that I would I would trust the city arborist over a over a private arborist that somebody pays for that's that's strictly for profit. So I would say yes please protect the tree as I always will say and this is actually quite a beautiful tree. I see the picture this is the one you know that this is very beautiful tree. I saw the the picture of the the tree the quite quite lovely tree. So yeah please please save the tree. Thank you, Nicole. Any questions of the deputants? Seeing none, now we have another deputant, Janice Lie. Is Janice Lie here in person or online? Online. Janice, you have five minutes. Oh, you have to unmute yourself. It's usually at the bottom of the window there's an unmute. It looks like a microphone. Oh. Oh, can we unmute her? She has to press the button herself. So, we can uh hold this item and while we try to figure out how Janice can unmute herself. So, we're going to go now to 33.20 which is 125 Florence Avenue application to remove a tree and we have two deputants. The first deputent is Nian Ta Mayor. Is that person online or in person? Online. Okay. So, we're going to go to Nian. Um, hi. >> Great. Nan, you have five minutes. Thank you. >> Yeah. Uh, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our community council members. Uh, to start, I need to go back a little bit to the history of our construction in this property. Uh we requested a lot severance in 2020 to build two detached houses in the place of the previous house in the property. The street tree in front of the house was aligned with the old house layout but with a new plan it would block the driveway of one of the houses. The average report we received in 2020 as the first step to get a construction permit was in favor of removal of three private trees and this city tree as it definitely would block the driveway. uh we followed the agorist recommendations for all other trees but for this street tree uh we had been advised that it would be a long process at least four to six months which would make a long delay for starting our construction project and as we already moved out we couldn't afford all the rent uh and construction expenses for 6 months then we choose to pres preserve the tree for the duration of construction. Uh but as soon as completion of construction, my project manager made a request for removal of the uh of the tree. At the time, some representative from urban forestry forestry came to my door and said he can remove the tree right away h at right at the time. But as we already made a deposit for preserving the tree, he advised us to first apply for refund of the deposit uh which in total the deposit that we paid with somewhere around $7,000 not for just for this year. I mean in total and then uh he said they will come and remove the tree. Uh then I requested to for a refund of the of the of my deposit but forest still rejected my request uh based on uh the fact that they said the tree is in poor condition and we um didn't preserve it properly. Then I applied for removal of the tree but again I got rejected this time because they claimed the tree is in good condition. Now I am confused. The tree is in good good condition or poor condition. It uh really shows that there is no standard between the representatives. Some of them say this is in good condition. Some say in bad condition. Uh the tree has obviously blocked the dry bail and entering and exiting off the garage is very difficult and unsafe and every time we have to cross over the small loan loan area around the tree. The urban forestry in their recommendations claimed that we didn't preserve the tree properly because there are signs of tire tracks around the tree which is obvious because we have to cross the small area every time. So we cannot preserve that loan as well. Uh now I have been waiting for this uh community council u for a long time uh from the completion of our um construction till 2023 and I kindly request the city the committee council to approve the removal of this tree. I believe this is reasonable request for the safety of the residents of the house. Thank you so much. Thank you. Any questions of the deputent? Yes, councelor Burnside. >> Yeah, just I have a question. Um I'm trying to understand the danger post. Uh could you help me understand because I'm looking at the >> Yeah, the danger is because if you want if you just uh look at the house, it doesn't seem like a danger. But if you want to just you need to maneuver your car to get to the parking. So if you want to go you know forward to the garage uh it is it's very difficult and if you want to get out of this backward it's difficult because you cannot see the uh exactly the cars coming towards so it is a a safety danger >> sorry how how wide is this driveway because >> driver is I don't know how wide it's a standard wide It's not that white because these are those kind of severance houses. So it's likeif 25 uh house 25 is >> it's not 50 25 we had a lot for 50 and then we severed it to 225 so it's not that big. >> So you can't see the tree right? Is that what you're saying? Uh, you can't see exactly the traffic that's coming from the other side of the from the other ways of the street. >> Okay. Well, well, be careful. Thank you. >> Any other questions of the deputent? No. I'm going to ask a question. So, uh, I'm just wondering, has your house been built now? The new house is built because I can't tell. There's no photos. So I only see the site plan. >> Yeah, I submitted Yeah. Yeah. The the house is uh just completed in 2023 and I I submitted a photo of that. I can submit a photo again. >> Yeah, >> that's interesting. >> Okay. And so when you applied for the severance to build this house at that time, did you make a commitment to preserving this tree? Yes, we made a commitment and we preserve the trees for the duration of the construction. >> But now you feel that it is impeding your safety. Is that correct? >> Uh yeah, actually at the beginning of the construction we had to remove it but because it made a delay in our construction project for six months. It was COVID time you know after COVID time so there was a backlog for all the permits and everything. So it made a long uh delay for our for starting our project. So we uh chose to preserve the tree for for the long of duration of the construction. >> And at that time who gave you permission to remove it? >> Oh uh we didn't get a permission to remove it. We had just the arborist recommendation to remove it. >> But not the city's arborist, a private arborist. a private office. I I didn't apply for that. >> Okay. >> Because we have been advised that it takes a very long time like like the one that I applied now. I've been applying for that like four months ago. >> Okay. Those are all my questions. Thank you. >> And now questions of staff. Does anyone have any questions of staff? Oh, there's one more speaker. Nicole Curado, you have five minutes. >> Yes. So, I was just going to say I noticed the the photo of the tree looks actually small enough that you could probably remove the tree without without killing the tree. You could probably actually dig the tree up and move the tree. And the other option is I mean I think a tree takes precedence over a driveway because we need more green space. This is also a native ma sugar maple tree. It's Canada's national tree. I would suggest if possible relocate the tree. It looks like the tree I wonder if that's a possibility for the city. And if not, um, find a way to relocate the driveway or find a way to to build the driveway around the tree because I'm sure that you could you could somehow build build around the tree. Oh, you know, build it like find a way to to I'm sure there's a way to make it work so that you can you don't have to actually cut the tree. you could just uh either relocate the tree or relocate the driveway. >> Thank you. Thank you, Nicole. Okay, that's it. Any question of the deputent? Seeing none, any questions of staff? I'm going to ask staff. So, is this tree movable as the deputent suggested >> through the chair? Technically, yes. Uh when the trees are this small, it's our preference to not um pursue that because we can replace it with a new tree that is guaranteed and under warranty uh and and suffer no loss of uh of growth uh or environmental benefits. If the tree were slightly larger, we might prefer a transplant option to avoid losing those benefits. >> Thank you. Those are all my questions. So, I would like to actually move to defer this to next community council. I'd like to visit the site and just see the safety implications and decide. Yeah, I'd like to defer it. All those in favor of deferring it. Thank you. Sure. We're going to go back to 33.3. Uh the motion is now ready. Councelor Burnside, if you want to move it. >> Yeah, the uh we're replacing the recommendations. Someone get on the screen. Anyway, we're going to adopt uh my recommendation is to adopt city uh the official plan amendment on 911 substantially in accordance with the recommended official plan in attachment two. And then uh and then use the direct staff to use site specific policies. 828. You can read. Oh, can no one read anything? It's going. Okay. Um >> Oh, here we are. >> There we are. >> So, this is about 911, which is basically staff recommendations for 911. And then I have another motion for 9:12 to defer that to the July meeting so that uh staff can have further conversation. Yeah. 7. Yeah. >> Great. So all those in favor of councelor Burnside's motions, we have to do item as amended. >> Item as amended. All those in favor that passes. Okay, moving forward to NY 33.21 by Vonda Avenue application to remove a private tree. We have two speakers. Dimmitri Kasu. Welcome Dmitri. You have five minutes. >> Hello. Good morning, chair and members of community council. My name is Dimmitri Kosuk, homeowner at 5 Vonda Avenue. Thank you for hearing my appeal today regarding the silver maple tree located in my rear yard. Since the city's inspection August 2025 by Patrick Burns, the condition of the tree had continued to deteriorate and significant new issues have emerged. I respectfully ask council to review the updated images I submitted to the city clerk's office on May 21st, 2026, which were uploaded to the community council portal. These images show a major branch failure near the rear wall of the home and clear evidence of significant root intrusion into the home's underground drainage and weeping tile system. These conditions reflect ongoing structural decline and increasing safety concerns, including visible wood failure within the tree itself. The tree is located less than 3 meters from my home's foundation. Recent camera inspections confirmed substantial root intrusion into the underground clay drainage and weeping tile systems, contributing to water backup and flooding concerns. This includes a major flood that occurred this spring as a direct result of root blockage within the drainage system. The CCTV drain inspection image dated February 20th, 2026 clearly shows roots inside the drainage system and extensive excavation work is now required by my drainage contractor and is scheduled to begin within the next few weeks. Due to the treere's close proximity to the house, the work will inevitably require severing major structural roots, which will further destabilize the tree and increase the risk to both property and safety. In addition, the tree has reached full maturity and is now exhibiting clear signs of structural decline, including wood fractures, decay, cavities, storm damage, weak branch unions, and reduced canopy condition. Consistent with the findings of the existing arborist report, given the combination of the treere's maturity, ongoing structural decline, confirmed infrastructure damage, and unavoidable impact of required excavation, I believe the tree can no longer be safely or practically retained. I respectfully ask council to approve the removal permit. I'm fully prepared to comply with all replacement tree requirements. I would also be happy to answer any questions council may have. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you, Dimmitri. Any questions of the deputent? No. Okay, great. Thank you so much. Any questions of staff? Oh, sorry, one more. Deputent Nicole Curado. Nicole, you have five minutes. I would say one thing. I was going to say that photograph of the sun shining through the silver maple tree is absolutely beautiful. And I really hope that that you can find a way to save this tree because this tree is absolutely spectacular. There are trees that sometimes will have holes in them, but often those those holes are from woodpeckers that and those holes often end up becoming homes for a lot of like little squirrels and other little animals. I I think it gives the tree character. It doesn't really seem like this tree according to the city is is really a problem. I think that often the problem is is that that you know they may have like older pipes that that are not tree proof. And I think that that you can probably solve the problems of trees generally don't break into pipes. If they they do it's probably because you got poor drainage. But uh I think I think that probably could be resolved. I think these issues could probably be resolved without cutting the tree because it would be very sad to cut this tree. is just very beautiful tree. >> Thank you, Nicole. Any questions of the deputent? Seeing none. Thank you. Okay, questions of staff. Any questions of staff? I I have a I have a question. So, there's a camera image where we see roots penetrating uh underground infrastructure for the house. It was submitted by the deputent. And I'm just wondering what does the city usually advise in that situation because it has caused flooding in the house already >> through the chair. Uh that image was uh I first saw it when you first saw it. Um but I'm I'm not I'm unclear how a tree in the backyard is causing damage to the pipes in the front yard. >> Presum >> the pipes are in the backyard according to the resident. actually file system around the house. >> This is >> I can answer regardless >> the no amount of damage to the pipes would cause forestry to approve the tree removal. We would look at a construction scenario. Uh if pipes were being replaced for construction, we would look at whether there are alternatives or not. And as a general practice, we would require alternative solutions to the drainage problem and still deny the tree removal. So, we would circle back to a denial and we'd be effectively in the same position. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions of staff? No. So, uh, I'm going to support the request for a tree removal. Um, I think it's very stressful when you do have penetr root penetration and you have to do all this extra work to ameliate and they're willing to do the tree replacement requested as required by the bylaw. So, uh I think that this will I I it is a beautiful tree and I Yeah, I don't um Okay, so we're going to take a recorded vote. So, all those in favor of allowing the tree removal, please raise your hand. So, councelor Cole, Deputy Mayor Cole and Councelor Chang are supporting the tree removal and all those opposed to the tree removal, councelor Burnside, Councelor Carol and Councelor Chair Noslin. So the tree removal um is not authorized. >> Oh no. >> Okay. So, >> I'll move the recommendations to staff. >> Councelor Carol is moving staff recommendations, which is a refusal of the true removal >> and I'm going to all those in favor. He wasn't. Yeah. So all those who support the staff recommendations of refusal, councelor Burnside, councelor Chair Nos Lynn. Okay, councelor Carol that's and then all those who oppose Deputy Mayor Cole and Councelor Ching. Thank you. I'm sorry. and Cher Noslin are in favor of staff recommendations. Thank you. Okay, we're going back to item number 19 for a speaker. Uh, this was 172 McNickel application to remove a a private tree. I believe we have Janice Lie on the line now. >> That's right. Can you guys hear me? >> Yes, we can. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. Thank you chair and apologies for the earlier inconvenience. Um can I share a bit presentation here? >> All right. Um Okay, I I don't think it works, but I'll just start. Uh, good morning members of North York Community Company Council. I'm representing my parents who are homeowners of 172 Monaco Avenue regarding the application of the Austrian pine tree. Um, the tree is located approximately 2.2 2 meter aways from my house and in between my neighbors and my house. Um, the Arborous report, which I'm not going to detail, cited poor conditions such as canopy health, significant lean towards the house, and close proximity resulting in potential structural liability. And for background, I just want to um provide further background. We have lived in this house for the last 25 years. We love trees. We have a century old tree in our backyard. But I wanted to elaborate why um I want um we're peeling today on this Austrian pine tree in the in in the front yard. Um these pine needles of these Austrian pine tree are tiny and thin. So they get stuck um in the gutters down spelts and the roof shingles and even if we use gutter guards like it doesn't work because it it gets stuck in the holes of those gutter guards. So this has caused substantial drainage and roof maintenance interference among the two properties. So every year my dad has to climb up the roof annually to clear the gutters, remove the pine needles, cup and even pruning o um branches that are overhanging the roof. However, he's now 75 years old and this has become increasingly unsafe and physically unfit for him. And I also don't have the physical capabilities to go up myself on the roof to do the this. And I just wanted to um elaborate this is not a simply a matter of inconvenience or routine tree maintenance. Again, we we love trees and we have no problem breaking leaves. We have lived with this um for the last 25 years. It's just that given my father's age, the recurring drainage interference, roof maintenance issues, and the ongoing need for um to access the roof has become impractical to manage long term. Um and this issue also not affects also affects the neighboring property, not just our home. So, I just wanted to um respectfully ask the community council consider this. Um the trees location creates ongoing drainage and roof maintenance interference affecting two properties and the recurring mitigation required is becoming unsafe and impractical due to the homeowner's age. Again I reiterate that my family does love trees um including a century old tree in the backyard. Unfortunately, this has just become a safe maintenance and safety burden for us and we understand the importance of maintaining enhancing Toronto's urban for uh forecast and we prepared to compile all replacement tree requirements. Uh thank you for your consideration and time today. >> All right. Thank you very much for your comments. Are there any questions for the deputants? >> No. Okay. Uh any questions for staff? >> Okay. Uh, councelor Carol. Um, speakers. >> Uh, yes. Um, you know, uh, with the with respect to the deputent, um, this this this appears on the agenda right after a tree that well and truly was leaning and and was a concern. And well, I appreciate what the private arborist may have said about uh, this particular tree. Our our city arborist report is pretty clear. This is a very healthy and maintainable tree and uh you know as we know uh um I've had no contact from from the residents and uh I'm going to support the arborist uh report from the city and uh ask that we move staff recommendations. >> Okay. Uh councelor Carol >> staff recommendations. >> Okay. Staff recommendations moved. All those in favor? Magic >> vote. All those in favor >> opposed. Uh that is carried. Uh we're now going back to item number 16. >> Yeah. So, Councelor Chang, uh we're on speakers, so you're moving a motion here. >> Already spoke on it. >> Yep. >> Sorry. >> Okay. Uh it's on the screen. >> Okay. So the motion is to grant the application for fence exemption for the property owner of 213 Northwood Drive direct and require that the enclosure be maintained in good repair without alteration and at such time as replacement of the enclosure is required that such installation will comply with municipal code chapter 447 fences or its successor by law. >> All right, any questions for the mover? No. Let's vote on it. All those in favor opposed. Uh that is carried. Now we're going to item number 20. Uh 125 Florence Avenue. Application to remove private private tree. Nin Tibbe mayor's being held. heard from. Okay. Uh so we're on item number 26. Metro links is Ontario line construction within North York district second quarter 2026 update. Uh it has been held. I have one uh deputent on the item uh Nicole Curado. >> Hello. Yes. I'm quite concerned about about the proposed pest control program for for rodent management. Most rodent management is is curl methods such as kill traps, um glue traps, which the animals rip their limbs off and injure themselves to try to get out of the glue and uh also rodenticides. And rodenticides pose a real threat to animals and not just rodents but also all kinds of other animals. And you know for example when mice and rats eat the the redenticide it does not stay in their bodies and it does not stay in the in the the bait box. It what happens is it it thins their blood which makes them more prone to being bit by fleas and ticks because the the blood flows more easily. it's easier for the fleas and ticks to bite. And also when other animals, you know, they they get slowed down. So when the mice and rats start moving around very slowly, they get eaten by other animals and who also then ingest anti-coagulant who are then weakened and it's easier for fleas and ticks to bite these other animals. Then you end up with issues like mange and you It just creates a whole lot of suffering. It's also incredibly painful to to die from these anti-coagulant poisons. So there I I would it's strongly suggest that you change the pest control strategy to a wildlife coexistence, a wildlife protection strategy. And I would suggest working with Rodenticide Free Ontario in Toronto Wildlife Center to develop a humane wildlife coexistence and wildlife protection strategy for for Metroinks. It it makes me very sad that Metro Links has instead chosen to to kill the wildlife. Thank you. Any questions of the deputent? >> If not, please please instead programs. >> Okay. Thank you very much for your comments. Um speakers on the item. No questions for S. Yeah. Yes. I mean, yes. No, please. Uh, >> uh, we we if we have any more chairs here, we're going to have a dining room set. >> Okay. Um, so it is good. I just want to note that it's good to see a timeline uh for the requirement that Metroinks trucks servicing the Ontario line carry identifying decals and have GPS trackers. Um can you expand on some of the details? What did what specifically um does heavy construction vehicles mean exactly? So like which trucks are going to be required and what does it mean exactly that it only applies to vehicles that regularly travel to and from Ontario line construction sites? Like if there's a day when you need more dump trucks, does that mean though some of them won't be required to have this? >> Thank you counselor for the question. Uh through you chair to the counselor. Um Metroinks is implementing the signage program as you know uh to mark all the trucks the to and from their site. It will include a majority of the dump trucks and delivery vehicles that are um heavy as you as you noted. And by the end of the year, a GPS tracker will also be implemented. U they've conducted tests early this year uh and they are currently in the process of procuring uh the equipment. >> Thank you. Uh Thorncliffe Park residents often mention the extensive loss of trees and other vegetation due to the Ontario line construction in an area that has already seen green space deteriorate. Um although it was a defining characteristic of the neighborhood when Thorncliffe Park was initially developed. What can be done to accelerate replanting especially within the community and expand the green space development in Thorncliffe Park? I mean it just there are literally massive swaths of trees that have been removed uh to build the Ontario line and there is major concern on this. >> Yeah. So through you to through the chair to the councelor um as you know there is a program of a 3:1 swap. Obviously we can't plant the trees while the construction is going on. So their their uh urban forestry is involved uh with Metroinks to uh put those trees back once most of the construction is done and they won't be damaged by further construction. >> Okay. Thank you. Um we're hearing from residents, drivers, and the Leid Business Park about increased traffic volumes due to the closure of Beth Nielson Road. And of course, this is a two-year closure. Um how is this being monitored? Uh Mr. Chair, um through you uh to the counselor. Thanks for the question. So councelor um transportation services staff actively work with the metro links uh to monitor the traffic conditions. Obviously the traffic condition Nav'i just one second. I would just ask is it possible chair to just ask for some quiet in the chamber? C councelor Cole and and staff. Uh we can feels like the Roger Stadium uh with the noise moving over here. So >> we need we need cameras in here. >> We can we just put a lid on the tea party and let councelor Chernos Lynn ask your questions. >> Sorry. Please go ahead. Thank you. >> Just just resuming Mr. Chair. Um uh to you uh councelor Chernos Lin. So the monitoring is mainly done by Metroinks. However, it is also supported by the city staff. Um, so our work zone coordinators or our inspectors um they routinely go out uh whether it's in a response to um a complaint or proactively uh and monitor the traffic conditions to ensure that it's closed smoothly and if there is any intervention that needs to be done, we do it on a timely basis. >> Okay. And just as a followup to that, what is the congestion threshold that would trigger additional metro links mitigation and funding for example for things like traffic agents just because of such extenduating circumstances? >> Yeah, I mean there is infield monitoring but also there is a modeling that is done uh prior to um implementing any traffic stage. In terms of the modeling, if uh through that an excessive queueing is observed in the through a model, you know, the traffic uh signal timing modifications are put in place and that can be aided uh also by traffic agents. However, uh if during construction our infield staff observes excessive queuing in a certain direction, then we go back to that model that was prepared earlier and see if there's any further improvements that can be done or we can just aid it by uh implementation of a traffic agent there to override the signal timing plans and make the traffic flow smoothly. >> Okay, thank you. Um my last question um is that as deputants that there weren't um there weren't vocal like oral deputants but we did have some rip written deputations um and residents from Thorncliffe Park and Leside indicated uh some concerns around the frequency and limited hours of the 156 bus and I'm just wondering uh with the closure of Beth Nielsen Drive um are the frequency and limited hours of the 156 bus sufficient in your opinion? >> Uh through you to the counselor. Um we understand there isn't an effect on the on that bus in particular. Uh perhaps the TTC could uh appine on that. >> Okay. Do we have someone from TTC here? Um, Council Chair Noslin, I I just want to remind you although the recommendations to move receipts, um, a motion to, uh, send it to council would be in order. >> Um, okay. Uh, let me I think that was really my last question. We don't have anyone from TTC here though, right? Just >> Yeah. No, you're welcome to expand on these at council if if need be. >> Okay. Um, >> all right. That's it for questions. Me? >> All right. Anyone any other questions for for staff on on this item? It's is a fairly weighty weighty document. Okay. Any speakers? >> Yeah. So, uh, councelor Chernos Lint to speak. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, I uh I just want to say that I I think it's really important that we get these reports and I really appreciate seeing this report come to North York Council and I know my residents very much appreciate seeing this report come to council uh because this is a massive project that's being undertaken that has really substantial implications for um so many different aspects of day-to-day life over years and years and years and the amount of disruption is really monumental. So to have this check-in is very much appreciated and I think it's important that we give it the time it deserves. Um and so I know people feel like they want to rush along, but I very much appreciate my colleagues indulgement of me being able to ask questions on such an important issue. Um, there are three in and outs of Thorncliffe Park for those of you who haven't ever been in this area. There's really only Overly Boulevard which exits to the east and to the west and then there's an area that goes up north through the business park. that area that goes up north through the business park um or south into Thorncliffe Park along Beth Nielsen Drive is closed for two years and it is having really significant implications for traffic particularly at rush hour and um as a result I do have a motion that I'd like to move if we could put that on the screen and this is just to request that the general manager of transportation services in consultation with the executive director ctor of transit expansion work with Metroinks to develop a plan to manage rush hour traffic along Brent Cliff from Wixed to Egllington caused by volume impacts resulting from the Beth Nielsen Drive long-term closure including but not limited to measures such as the hiring of traffic agents. And I really want to stress that I do believe this is Metroinks's responsibility to pay for this. This should not be the city of Toronto that is required to pay for this. This is really an outcome of the Ontario line construction uh and the way they're going about doing the Ontario line construction. They did not want to build uh a separate road to be an alternative. They didn't want that cost and the work to do that. So, I think this is a very minimal piece that we could be asking for to help um assuage uh some of the traffic wos that are really becoming somewhat dangerous. So, uh I just would appreciate um hopefully we can get this passed and and uh I look forward to the next report to North York Community Council um on the Ontario Lines progress. Thank you. >> Okay. Um thank you very much, Councelor Chernos. Then the motion is on the screen. Um all those in favor opposed. Uh that is carried. Uh item number 27. >> I'd like to move to defer this item. Uh I have a deferral motion. >> Um I was kind of expecting that. Um okay. >> Yeah. So this there's a significant um report here that is going to reroute part of Young Street towards Steels. There's a rerouting of Young Street. So I just uh would like to invite Metro Links and they have expressed that this is something they are going to do to do some engagement before we pass this. So we'll just bring it back July 7. >> All right. I I have mentioned earlier the risk of deferring all these items uh means that we could be here all day and into the evening. I have some controversial planning development applications coming which will absorb a lot of time as well. Just a heads up but um I'd be happy to support your motion. >> Great. Thank you >> with that cautionary tale. Okay. All those in favor opposed. That is carried. Oh, and a reminder, um hopefully we can finish. Uh we have uh the raising of the pride flag at 12:30 item uh item number 31. >> Chair, I believe, um oh, they're coming in. The speaker is is here. >> Okay. Um, item number 31, we have uh Joe Goldman. Joe Gman online. Hello. Uh, my name is Joel Goldman. I live at 78 Forest Heights Boulevard, which is across the street from 83 Forest Heights Boulevard. It's also uh directly across the street from what I call the green public green space, walkway, parket, whatever we want to call it. Uh, it's a main thoroughfare for and and play area for kids going to school. There's a park bench there for people to sit on. And uh all I can say is uh the applicants uh when they bought the house, they knew where the property line was situated. Uh they've actually it's a bifurcated situation, but I found out that maybe we don't have to worry about the the area that instead of encroachment, it's actually been annexed and co-opted. So that may not be an issue. But the the the applicants still want to uh go into the parkquette by about 3 feet. And uh we want our green space back. I've lived there for 20 years. Mrs. Ashby's here. She's lived in the area for 20 years. She's at one end of this uh green space. I'm at the other. And uh you know, we just this is this has been one of the attractive parts of our neighborhood. So, you know, if it was something perhaps minor in in in the request, but three feet's a lot. If that's what what it winds up winds up being, a meter, whatever that is, that that's wanting an awful lot of space into the parket. uh again knowing where the where the property line uh was when they bought the house and if they had to scale back the construction they had ample opportunity. It was a brand new build. They tore down uh and the fence, you know, went from being a construction fence to a permanent fence with the anchored in by 6x6 posts that embedded into the ground with with cement uh anchors. So, you know, I I don't know what else to say, but I'm only one person. We had a lot of neighbors that would have loved to have attended today. They're not happy with it either, but a lot of people don't want to stick their necks out. So, I'm here. Mrs. Ashby's here. I brought a couple of letters with me from some of the neighbors. And uh we're against it. That's We just want our We want our green space back. Like I say, I live in close proximity to it as does Mrs. Ashby. And it's as simple as that. >> Uh thank you. Thank you for your comments. Um just what what what green space is this public green space that you're losing? Is that what you're saying? Is it um a park? >> He wants his green space back. I'm asking what green space that is. >> I just want to understand. He says he wants his green space back. I'd like to know what that is. Are you finished with me? >> Well, I like I'm trying to get an answer. What What is this green space? >> Uh, you know what? I think at one time in the history of the neighborhood, it was uh two blocks of roadway that was Harrison Road. The Harrison family have a a century old home right at 111. That's where Mrs. Ashby lives. And I guess at some point two blocks of Harrison between Truman Road and Old Colony Road were closed off and turned into green spaces again with park benches and trees and people walk their dogs and kickballs around with their kids in there and uh and so yeah, that's one of the charm. I I live adjacent to it as does Mrs. Ashby and she's going to come up here and speak I suppose. So, you know, to have uh to have this kind of appear on the on the doorstep is like very unexpected. >> So, um what we're being asked to decide is uh whether uh general manager transportation services to enter an encroachment agreement. >> Sorry, I can't hear you very well. We're being asked to decide whether to authorize the general manager of transportation to enter an encroachment agreement with the property owner at 83 Forest Heights Boulevard to permit a wooden fence subject but not limited to the following conditions. There's serious conditions. This fence will cut you off from the green space that you're referring to. >> No, it would it would to use the word you're using encroachment. It would come from the property line westward into the green space by what I've been told by uh by David here today. It's by about 3 feet. Call it one meter if you want. So it's it run it'll run north south. I there are materials here that show a drone drone photos of the of the uh how the houses are situated. If you don't have them >> I think uh Parker has them. >> I'm trying. So that may help you understand the orientation of everything. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions for the deputent? I'm hoping I can see. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you. >> That's the only speaker I have on the item. Questions for staff. Oh, sorry. Uh well, you're not on the list. No, that's very nice. But I don't you are not on the list I've been provided. What do you want to do? Uh, Kelly, Kelly Morell. Well, you're on the list now. Okay. Thank you for joining us. You have five minutes. >> Thank you, council. And uh apologies for the disruption with I thought I'd filled everything out online. Uh what Joel's saying is is correct. As the as the property sits now, um there is an encroachment on the on the public space. Um this nightmare of a build we've been in um is is not your issue, it's ours. Uh that includes litigation, fraud charges, both civil and criminal to a builder that we put a lot of trust in to build our so-called dream home. and uh to no avail that we've uh we've encountered some some major issues. One of those issues is communication with the property line and when where the house was was ended up being built and to where we thought the property line was and where it is is very different. Um we are not builders. We are two homeowners. We've never built a home before. We This is a first for us and a last for us. Um, I do want to acknowledge the bylaw officers that have been extremely patient and forgiving with us um because we've been abandoned by the builder uh completely. Um, so we're trying to do this on our own and we have no idea kind of how to do this as it relates to the issue on hand. where the property line sits today. There's a parquette to the west side as Joel was explaining and there is a there is a uh that fence line will be will end up being three feet from our from our home from a side door from a from two major windows. Um we were told that the property line was was this other fence post that was there. It's no never been our intention to to m the fence line today is about 25 ft from the house. It was never our intention to keep it that way. It was to bring in to it was to bring it in to the property property to the proper property line. Uh in so doing in so doing that we've realized that the fence line is literally against our house. Um we've had a home invasion and six cars stolen. So I have four teenagers and safety is our main priority. This is a safety issue. This is not a we want more space issue. Um, we just want to be able to have not people look over our fence from a parkquette that people walk back and forth. Again, the parket is still very large once you move our fence line back. It's also important to note the back side of our home is on the property line. The actual where the home starts is where we want the is where we're appealing for the 3-t encroachment. Our the prop the fence is now 3 ft away from the from the home. We're asking for it to be six feet away. Um, I think the drawings are there. they're submitted. Again, even just getting things like those drawings are are even a difficult task for us. Um, from it's been my knowledge, to my knowledge, the TRCA and the city of Toronto have approved this, but this is the final our kind of final piece into to try to get this. We're also committed to to planting trees or are beautifying the space, whatever that may take. Again, this is primarily and only a safety issue for the for the ch for for our kids and for our family. So, that's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Any questions for the deputent? Councelor Chang, >> did you also build a new curb cut uh that because you have a driveway in front of your house, but now is there an additional curb cut that was added that encroaches on the park? >> No. So, >> not not that I'm aware of. No, the the and all the curb cuts were done through the city of Toronto through But no, there's not a new permit. There's not a new driveway curb cut through the parkhead. No, >> but you have two accesses. >> I do. >> And did that always exist? >> No. The new curb cut is on um the face street uh the the street facing north. So, when you purchased this house, there was already two curb cuts to the driveway. >> I don't think so. >> Uh, >> I I'm looking at a 2019 Google Street View and I don't see that, but I see a a curb cut that is accommodating the parkquette, but not to a driveway. >> The drive again, the driveway. So the driveway is FA. So the driveway is a is a roundabout driveway, I guess, if you will, is a is a is a throughway. The the curb cut by the parkquette was the one that was always there. The the the curb cut to the to the street level. Um I had that curb cut like the city of Toronto cut that curb from for me >> for us. >> That's on the street like the the street that's going um east uh east west. And just wondering who granted permission for the additional space to where you currently have your fence line. Did you get permission to move put the fences there? >> That fence was there before we got there. So that there was a construction fence. So we replaced the construction fence because the because the property has looked like a like first of all it was derelictked, I believe. And then but Joel would know that more than I would. Um, we bought the property as a as a home with a and the fence was on that line. So, we just replaced the construction fence with a with a fence to and unlike what Joel me that is not a permanent fence. Um, that fence was always intended to come down. >> Okay, those are my questions. Thank you. >> All right, thank you. Uh, thank you, Councelor Chang. Okay, councelor Chernos. >> Thank you. And I I do want to say like I'm sorry that you've had to go through uh this experience with a builder um you know in terms of a fraud case all those kind of things. I'm sure that's been really stressful. >> I I'm unclear in how you think a like in a changing like having a fence put there is going to protect you because you've had a fence there. you're telling us you've had cars stolen. I mean, I think we're all familiar with this in Toronto. Um, and it's not to say that that wouldn't be traumatic or anything, but I'm unclear in why this fence, what you're asking for, uh, having an encroachment makes it safer. >> You have a fence right now. And you'd have a fence regardless of, you can always put up a fence whether it's on the property line or whether it's encroached. I guess what I'm unclear is is how it's safer somehow. >> Yeah, great question and thanks for acknowledging the fact that the this the stress because it's it's been a whole other level. Um we feel we're at the finish line. So that's a good news on the on the fence issue for So let's talk about the stolen cars for a second. That was done before our gates and our fence was up and and our actual front fence. So there's a little bit less access now and again we we we closed off from the fence to the gate as well. So from a from a car stone perspective, we're we're comfortable there. From a from a home invasion perspective, they'll we're not that's where the stress the stress levels come in. What we found in that parkquette um is it just it'll be a little bit further away from the home. So people that are walking through the through the parket and coming close to the fence line, they won't be able to just kind of look over and kind of see inside our home. that extra three feet by looking over. We feel that the again the extra three feet will just be a little bit more distance from where the fence is, people creeping over. We have people creeping into our backyard all the time. Um like all the time and whether that be from neighbors from there always they're always people around. So we just feel that extra little distance and again it's not and again it's only on the the home part not the not the not the yard part. Um, we feel that that little bit of distance will prevent people from being able to see directly into our home, into the door and into the into the windows, into the living room, into the office. >> I don't have any further questions. >> Thank you. >> So, thank you. >> I I just have a couple. So, let me get this straight. Your your home has been subject to a number of different criminal elements. Trespass, car theft, home invasions. >> Yes. Okay. And and it's your belief that if you get this extra three feet and can move your fence three feet into public lands, you will be better protected. >> I don't think it will hurt. Like I don't think it will hurt because as it stands today, the three feet I mean 3 feet from here to the home with the big windows and the big doors, it's easy to to kind of just look over and see. I think that extra Listen, my wife wanted six to nine feet and we're like we just we she would have felt safer there. I think from our standpoint that's that's that's we wanted to be respectful of the of the city and the neighbors and and everything that we could be to to to encroach as little as possible. We do think that extra three feet will give onlookers that can tiptoe over the fence. We do believe that it'll we'll be safer for it. Yes. So the have you received approval from building on the new fence or you're not there yet agreement first and then you would build the fence? >> Yeah, we've we've received approval from TRCA and from the city of Toronto >> and is it have you got a fence exemption? Is it the normal six feet or what? >> I don't know the answer to that. I I I believe it to be normal >> six feet. Okay. All right. Um, councelor Cole, >> have you ever thought has the fence been built yet? >> There's a construct. There's a So, there's there's two parts of the house. There's the backyard and then there's the house part. So, I'll I'll compartment compartmentalize the two the two pieces. The the the yard part, the fence is built. The the the house part. There was a construction fence there. We replaced that with a fence just because it looked terrible. >> Um, so >> the house part, the fence is up. The house part, the fence has been up. This went up way before we were even there. >> And is that encroaching? >> Yes. Oh, it's encroaching by 25 ft. >> 25 ft. >> Yes. That construction that construction fence has been on has been on the park at 25 ft from our house. We're asking it to be six. >> Yeah. >> What? >> And it's an apologies. It's been like that since before we bought the property. >> So why why not uh how high is the fence? >> I think it's regulation >> six feet. So how about what if you make the fence higher? The fence will be higher for the fence is higher is fine as when you're closer, but it's still it's still I think an issue if you're walking down the path and being that close to the house and being able to almost touch the house from the fence and >> but maybe what you need is a fence. There's uh the regulation height is six feet for fences. So what if you ask for a fence height exemption so you can uh raise that uh to six and a half feet? I don't know. Why not look at that rather than encroaching on the green space? >> My slight concern again from from a safety perspective is the closeness, the proximity of the fence to the house. And again from, you know, from what we were told and what what the reality was after the fact was very different. I wouldn't have built the house 3 ft from the from 3 feet from the fence. I wouldn't have done that. We would have pushed the house over. There's room on the other side to push the house over. I would have made the house smaller. So my again my issue is that if I'm three feet away from a fence, you know, from here away to the house. >> Yeah, >> that's a bit of So I mean I have four teenagers and there's there's all kinds of kids with all they have to do is climb the fence and they can almost reach my door handle from the three feet of the fence like close. >> Yeah. But I'm saying if you make it higher >> so they climb it, right? >> To climb. >> Yeah. >> Uh but anyways, just thought. Yeah. Okay. I know it's complicated, but that >> it's complicated and it's and it's and it's been a major issue and I >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, now you have questions. Okay. So, we're done with the deputent. Is can we conclude that? Okay. So, we will move to questions for staff. Um, I realize we're racing a little bit above the clock for the pride fund, uh, flag raising, uh, but I'm sure for a few minutes late, it won't be the end of the world. Okay, questions for staff. Uh, councelor Chernos. Oh, I need a motion to extend. Uh, extend to finish. All those in favor? Opposed? That's carried. Okay. Um, councelor Chernoslin. So, um, my first question is this came to this came for a decision a few years ago and it was refused. Is that correct? >> Through the chair, this came to I've been in North York for two and a half years. This this issue came to North York by law enforcement about two and a half years ago with relations to other issues that were surrounding the property. Okay. But I believe this actually came like an encroachment um uh case came before in 2021. Is that correct? >> It it quite possible that it was an encroachment, but I think it was it was declined as that as that fence as the property owner alluded was approximately 25 feet away from the the property line. >> So it's been declined before in its back. Is that correct? >> Correct. At one time. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, if if this motion is denied, it looks as though the applicant has paved over a section of the parkland. Um, so if if this was denied, we would need them to put the fence back to where it was originally, like along the property line, but they would the the land would need to be restored to the original parkland. Is that correct? >> Through the chair, when it comes to the plans that were submitted for the construction of the home, I do realize that there's two entrances there. one may have been used as a construction access. This particular file has not been closed in transportation services. Um once a final inspection is conducted, that's when concrete work is completed throughout the road work. The road work the side the curb work was completed and that's when all is restored to what was submitted on the site plans. >> And who would be responsible for that? >> That would be transportation services right of way. But the applicant would presumably be >> well the applicant the applicant would have to pay for the concrete work all the city work that would be done they would pay for that to make the full restoration when it comes to it's full restoration including sod or what was damaged during construction. >> Okay. And um so the building permit is actually still active on the site. >> The actual construction building permit I can't speak to that. That's the buildings division. >> Okay. >> I'm speaking with regards to the construction access permit that is issued by transportation services. >> Okay. And um if the if the building permit or sorry if the encroachment agreement is refused uh and the applicant is required to um put the fence back to the original property line, they could still bring a request for a fence exemption to have it higher if they wanted. Correct. like if they wanted to perhaps address their concerns about people looking in if that was their concern. I mean, I'm five feet tall. I'm not going to be able to see over. Um I'm not even sure if I'm five feet anymore, but I one time I was five feet, so I couldn't see over, but a really tall person maybe could or someone on somebody's shoulder. So, just to address their concerns, they could bring a a fence exemption request to council. That would be their choice if they wish to if this was refused they can take that avenue but that would also be another application through municipal licing and standards. >> Okay. So I guess my last question this may be for transportation. If if this application were refused um would we need something in the recommendations to ensure that the land is restored to its original condition? That would be a bylaw issue at that point in time. If it was refused, our bylaw officers would go out and order the property owner to remove the fence and restore the property to its original condition. >> Okay. I think um chair, I'll just need I wonder if we could just hold this one for a few minutes. Oh, no. After >> after any other questions from >> I'm going to jump in here. First of all, councelor Chang has has questions for for staff. I This is This can't get much messier than this. I know I've been against deferrals all morning. Uh but this is one that actually justifies it. Um if if the local counselor agrees, >> I'm not really eager to I'll be honest. I'm not really eager to defer this because I think it's been very stressful for a number of people including the applicants. Um so I would just appreciate a few minutes to just sort that out. I wonder if we could um go to the flag raising and I could have just a few minutes to sort that out and and obviously my colleagues if they wish to ask questions with staff. I just think sometimes deferring items like this causes more stress for people than than we need to. >> Yeah. >> What what do you think about compromise here? Do you want to break for half an hour? >> Okay. So, no, you're entitled to your opinion, councelor Chang. I'm just making a suggestion. Do you want to break for half an hour? Um, do the flag raise and then finish the agenda or do you want to council Chang disagrees. What? Go ahead. >> If you finish it now, we we've got people waiting. I don't know why it was scheduled at 12:30. Quite frankly, it was Okay, Council Chen, questions for staff. >> So, I note that where the fence is right now, if you go back a few years, there's actually a gradient. So, in the path beside it, there is like a little hill. It's all grass and then it's the driveway of the previous house. Now it's been flattened and totally paved beyond the initial property line. So when we say so my first question is who owns that land where that's been flattened and paved over? Is it who is it parks or is it transportation? the prop the property to the side of the house where we have the fence issue. That is uh City of Toronto property. It's not parks. It's it's it's city of Toronto property and the conservation authority has say over what happens within those >> who maintains it. So when we cut grass along that path, is it parks or is it transportation? Unfortunately, I'm unsure at that with regards to no >> because that ownership, whoever owns that land and maintains it, they should get the say of how it's ailarated. And I am curious how you would bring it back to original condition when it's been the grading has changed. There was a natural hill that was there before and it sloped downward. So I'm just curious like if we are let's say we are asking them to restore is it just saw or who's going to make that rule of what is required because whoever is maintaining it would be the ones who should have a say of what that land should look like. Well, through the chair conditions of a building access permit, once you uh use the property, possibly damage it, you have to restore it to the same or a better condition. Now, when it comes to maintenance of the property within section 743, property owners, residential property owners are to maintain the property adjacent to their homes. So if it's if it if if it goes back to being sawed rather than maybe bushes that were there at that time, the property owner would be obligated to mow the lawn and keep it tidy within the restrictions of height. My last question is when we allow encroachments on building fences and they are allowed to use that area for staging, do we allow them to pave it over like that and and almost assume occupancy of that land? Well, with a with a construction access permit, you need a hard surface because if vehicles or heavy equipment are traveling over a soft surface, what happens is they drag the mud out into the road and it causes quite the issue on the roadway. >> So, we granted the permission to do the encroachment and of is it 25 ftroachment? >> No, no. the the construction access that was provided has to be a soft sur a hard surface or a granular surface that will prevent the spread of mud or traction of dirt onto the roadway. Once that constru, it's a temporary construction access. Once the construction is completed and the property owners have done their landscaping, transportation revisits the site and says, "Okay, now you've used this temporarily. Now you need to restore it to the same condition or better." At that point in time, we also have our operations and management crew that go they they provide an estimate for the curb work or any damages that that have been created during construction. An estimate is given to the property owner and they pay that estimate and the work is completed from there. >> I have a hard time that no staff here know who owns that land. Which division of our city? How is it that >> it is it's it's under transportation? Yeah, it's under transportation's purview with the overseeing from the conservation authority as well. >> Ah, okay. it it's the untraveled portion of transportation. >> So parks doesn't maintain this area. Okay. Thank you. Those are my questions. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Chang. Um speakers, um I I think we're done with questions. Um unless there's more. Uh so let's go to speakers and let's see if we can bring this to resolution. >> Okay. So um I just like I this is a very messy situation as you can tell. I think everybody here realizes this is quite a messy situation. And I think fundamentally for me and I I do appreciate the challenge that the homeowners have in terms of they've acquired a home that they were misled on um apparently and that it is built perhaps it was built too close to the property line. Um, that being the case, from a just from a just from a like a basics point of view, I don't believe we should be in the business as a city of Toronto of giving away public land to private homeowners. Um, I just I just don't. And I know um that may seem unfortunate to the homeowners and I appreciate that and I understand why you're asking, but I just philosophically don't believe that that's what we should be doing. Um and we see property disputes on a regular basis when people have fences over one way too far or the other and people are fighting over a fence line. This is one essentially with the city of Toronto and I think we are best as we are normally between property owners to have it along the property line. Um and so I'm I am going to move that we deny this AC encroachment. Uh and um unless my colleagues think it's uh I was just going to outright deny it. Uh, and I'm going to assume that staff will be able to manage the other pieces, uh, of making sure that it's put back according to what the original site plan was. Um, and to ensure that it gets back to the appropriate condition. Um, but if my colleagues feel that I need to do something additional to ensure that, I'm no. Okay. So, I'll move uh that we deny this request. >> Uh, councelor Carol. Well, I was just it it's it's more for me an issue more of the clerk rather than the the counselors. Um uh so we're not authorizing the encroachment, but there's no alternative recommendation in the report. Do we need to move language that says return the site to its original condition? >> Yeah, Mr. Chair, I think that would be appropriate if we could have some wording around that. >> Okay. So, we'll get some wording. uh to you if you could just give us two minutes. Maybe we can move on to the last item. >> Yeah, we'll go to the last item. Um I I would just just very briefly speak. In fact, I I believe uh in in in personal safety of homeowners and I think the appeal here uh is is reasonable and I'll be the um contrarian view and and support the homeowner and authorize the general manager to negotiate an encroachment agreement with the property owner. I would have if that motion if that motion carries I would ask that that the report be brought back once the negotiation was complete to see what was agreed to. Um, but you know, personal safety, property safety is one of the biggest issues in our city. Now, when when polling takes place and they ask what your priorities, it's usually affordability and safety. And if we can do this, give up this small piece to uh give peace of mind to this homeowner, uh, I I think I think it's a reasonable request. The city will not fall apart if it gives away three feet of public land uh, with conditions with strict conditions. So that's my that's my position. So I'll not be supporting I will be supporting uh the the staff report to authorize the general manager to negotiate this. So um but it's being held down because I believe a motion's coming. Okay. So we we're going to hold this item down and go to uh number 35. Okay. Uh speakers uh councelor Chang >> I have an amendment. So we're just amending uh to delete the word not. Uh and so what that means is we are adding speed humps to Florence. I canvased in the rain. Uh all the residents who live on Florence in the stretch and resounding 80% of those who filled out our survey want speed humps uh to be added. so that all the streets exiting this neighborhood will have speed humps according to the report by staff. Um as well as one proposal to move one of the speed humps. So I really thank the community because they worked very hard. Uh, it's great when you have a strong neighborhood association that's engaged, that is advocating, and I really want to thank the West Lancing Homeowners Association uh, who brought this proposal forth and all the work uh, including Deemos Zaratas who personally has drawn out the streets where, you know, which ones he felt the speed humps were required. So, this is a huge community effort and uh I'm grateful to see that we're going to see speed humps because the streets will be safer uh for all the pedestrians and the community members. So, thank you. >> Thank you uh councelor Chang. Any other speakers on the item? Uh let us uh bring to a vote. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. The item is amended. All those in favor opposed. That is carried. Uh, now can we go back to is there a motion for We have sent in some Yes, I've sent in um Parker has sent in some language to Matthew to the clerk. So, it should be I think they're just looking at it quickly and and really the language is just that we refuse the appeal of the encroachment agreement and require that city lands currently encroached upon are restored to their previous condition. Okay. All those in favor opposed. That is carried. And let's do the bills. >> Okay. Uh, councelor Carol. >> Oh, okay. The bill's uh 563 to 568. prepared for the May 26, 2026 meeting number 33 of the North York Community Council be declared as bylaws and passed subject to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto Act of 2006. >> All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. Confirmatory bills. Councelor Chang. that confirmatory bills to confirm the legislative proceedings of the North York Community Council acting under delegated authority of meeting 33 on May 26, 2026 be declared as bylaws and passed subject to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto Act 2006. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much. All those in favor? Opposed? That is carried. We are done today's business. Thank you very much. Councilors, city staff, members of the public, clerk's office. What's up?