Good morning everyone. I'm just testing my connection. If someone can please confirm anyone I guess not. Okay. Uh, councelor Croissanti, we can hear you well. We're just going to take a moment before we start just to get a couple of other pieces in place. >> I'll try once again. Good morning, everyone. >> I'm just testing my connection here. >> We can hear you very well, Councelor Croissanti. We're going to get started in a couple of minutes. >> All right, perfect. Thanks. Uh, good morning everyone. Thank you for your patience. I'm councelor Steven Holiday. I'm the chair of the the Atobico York Community Council. We have quorum and I'm now calling meeting number 32 to order. Welcome everyone. Today's meeting is being held by video conference and in person at the Atobbico Civic Center in the council chamber. The meeting is also being livereamed online at youtube.com/toorronto city council live. Although we may be meeting in different locations today, community council would like to acknowledge that the land we are meeting on is the traditional territory of many nations, including the Missosagas of the Credit, the Anesnab, the Chipoa, the Hudnosi, and the Wendat peoples, and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit, and Matei peoples. We also acknowledge that treaty uh excuse me I'll acknowledge that Toronto is covered by treaty 13 with the missagas of the credit. If you're registered to speak at today's meeting, please listen for me to call your name. I will call speakers in the order that they appear on the list. The list of speakers can be viewed online by visiting the atobico york community council page at toronto.ca/counsel and clicking the speakers box for today's meeting. Members, the city clerk has published all agenda materials on toronto.ca/counsel and on the CMP, the clerk's meeting portal. Clerk's IT staff are available to members if you need help with your devices. I also want to remind you to please submit and approve your motions by email. Staff are available at etcc toronto.ca to help with motions. Are there any declarations of interest under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act? If you do have an interest, please indicate the item number and the nature of the interest. Seeing none, we will proceed. May I have a motion to confirm the minutes from our meeting on April 29th, 2026? Uh, councelor Mley moves all those in favor. Any opposed? And that carries. Thank you for that. We'll go through the agenda items and we'll get to some new items of business at the end. Our first item is EY21.1. Excuse me. Switch these glasses. I think EY 32.1, 2686, and 2688 Lakeshore Boulevard West official plan and zoning bylaw amendment application, a decision report, and we will hold that for speakers. Our next item is EY 32.239 Newcastle Street, official plan and zoning bylaw amendment application decision report. We will hold that for speakers. uh EY 32.35000 Dundas Street West zoning bylaw amendment application and decision report. We will hold that for speakers. EY 32.4 1243 Islington Avenue zoning bylaw amendment application and decision report. We'll hold that for speakers. EY 32.5 3100 Weston Road zoning bylaw amendment application appeal report. We will hold that for speakers. EY 32.6555 Rexdale Boulevard Woodbine secondary plan study infrastructure master plan and transportation master plan and interim report. We will hold that for a speaker. EY 32.751 Burnham Thorp Crescent application to remove two private trees. We'll hold that for a speaker. EY 32.84 84 Bitton Avenue, request for a fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. Hold that for a speaker. EY 32.950 Northland Avenue, request for a fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. We will hold that for speakers. Ey 32.1080 1080 Pelmo Crescent request for a fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. We will hold that for a speaker. Uh EY 32.11 Al Street traffic calming speed humps. This is uh ward three. Uh councelor Moley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, I'd like to move deferral indefinitely on this particular item. We've been in the neighborhood doing a number of interventions related to traffic calming and safety. Uh we want to allow that to proceed and see the impact on traffic patterns before we um do any additional interventions. So we'll just moving be moving deferral on this item. >> Councelor uh excuse me, Deputy Mayor Moley moves uh deferral indefinitely. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Our next item is EY 32.12 Jeff Coat Drive traffic calming speed humps. Councelor Croissanti. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be moving staff recommendations on this item. Thank you. >> Councelor Croissanti moves staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? And that item carries. EY 32.13 Metro Links Egun Cross Town West extension station construction long-term temporary road closures and traffic bylaw amendments. That's W two. I will move these. I will express my thanks to staff for both um very detailed work on this and I think uh some some adjustments that are for the better and I do acknowledge this is very difficult. This will be a long difficult construction period but am grateful for those that are involved making this the best that it can be. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Ey 32.4 for Humberline Drive and Clareville Drive South intersection pedestrian crossing protection. Um, councelor Croanti. >> Uh, yes. Thank you, Mr. uh, chair. I will be moving staff recommendations on this item as well. Thank you. >> All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 32.15 Black Creek Drive and Western Road pedestrian crossing protection. Councelor Nunziata. >> I'll move the staff recommendations. >> Councelor Nunzi moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries EY 32.16 Lakeshore Boulevard West at Silver Moon Drive lane designation. Councelor Mley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Are we moving the staff recommendations? >> Councelor Moley moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries EY 32.17 Roseme Avenue parking amendments. Councelor Moley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Similarly, here moving staff recommendation with thanks. >> Councor Mly moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. EY 32.18 Remington Drive parking amendments. This is at a school. I'll move those recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh EY 32.9 4319 Blur Street West designation of fire routes. An amendment to chapter 880 fire roots. This is in W two. I'll move the recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Members, there are two items so far that require uh motions to add as new business. Our first motion is um Liz Road installation of speed humps. This is from councelor Nunata. May I take a motion to add this as business councelor? Councelor Nunzetta moves to add this as new business. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. And there's a second one. Uh reducing cut through traffic in the Maple Leaf neighborhood. Councelor Nenziata, motion to add his new business. >> Councelor moves. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Okay, that's our agenda for now. We'll back up to the top to our first item. Our first item of business is EY 32.12686 and 2688 Lakeshore Boulevard West official plan and zoning bylaw amendment application and decision report. Our first speaker is Andrew Feranchic, WND Associates. Um, welcome Andrew. Let's just get that mic set up and uh, >> you try the >> testing. Oh, >> much better. >> Uh, welcome to community council. You've got five minutes. Please begin. >> Thank you very much and good morning. My name is Andrew Franchic. I'm a planner for the applicant for this application. Um, we are here in support of the staff recommendations and we have a very brief presentation that I asked my colleague here to flip through. Uh, next page and maybe this the one after that too. So, the site's located on the north side of Lakeshore Boulevard just west of Royal York Road. Um, it's on a particularly deep portion of this lot. Um, this is a portion of Lakeshore that has a variety of building types including mid-rise buildings up to eight stories as you can see off to the right. Um, and it's got good proximity to transit and also to the GO station to the north um on Royal York Road. Next page. The site's on an avenue and um, as this council knows, the avenues are one of the places where the city seeks to channel intensification. Uh, this is a mid-rise form of intensification that is proposed. Next, the south side of the street has apartment neighborhood designation and apartments and a mix of houses as well. Um, as does the north side despite that it's neighborhoods. It also has apartments and it has some houses. Um, and what's being proposed is an official plan amendment. Again, this is a very deep portion of the block and as noted in the staff report, this is a block that's in transition. It's one that staff is also considering um in its uh official plan updates for avenues as being appropriate for mid-rise more broadly. Next, what's important is that the mid-rise guidelines distinguish deep lots for being appropriate for some additional height. This 12story building um has been deemed by staff to comply and and uh meet the intent of the mid-rise guidelines in this regard. Next, rear transition has been considered. there's a 7.5 then a 10 meter setback from the rear which complies with the midterized guidelines um and that was very carefully worked through with staff um over the course of a year. Next uh the site has 172 units at 12 stories and it's designed in mass in accordance with uh with urban design staff. Next, um just in the interest of time, we'll just say that there's a lot of open space on the site. And the next page shows uh that there's consideration, if we can just go to the next page. Um there's consideration for landscaping all around the edges, including on the north side where single detached residential. There's rooftop amenity as well. Um and the sense of openness um is is maintained by the overall massing. Next, lastly, and very importantly, the streetscape will be significantly improved along the street. We're just having a problem with the page there. Thank you very much. Um, and and a curb to building face that's generous and provides room for for landscaping and street trees will be provided along with one single point of access that will take all of the servicing and everything right off the street. There's some live work along the street that's proposed as well to animate the street. Uh it's really the beginning of a transformation of this block over the longer term into what it was always designated to be as an avenue. Um subject to any questions that's my presentation and I appreciate your time. >> Thank you. Are there questions of the speaker? Uh councelor Mley. >> Good morning. Thanks for being with us today. Um I just wanted to follow up. Thank you for the presentation and submission. Um we know there were some surrounding neighbors who did do a petition and had raised some concerns related to this um proposal including some hydrogeeological issues related to below grade um water table and things of that nature as well as proximity to the rear yard. Can you talk to me and this council a little this committee rather a little bit about um your engagement with the surrounding neighbors as related to this application? >> Certainly. So and we are aware of those concerns uh also through the public meeting. Uh the site's been vacant as you know for quite some time. There was a previous townhouse proposal that started construction but never finished. Unfortunately that was the previous owner who kind of let it go to seed and there's a bit of a swamp on the site right now and it doesn't look very nice. The idea is to completely um obviously eliminate that condition and replace it with the brand new building which will consider all of the hydrogeeological issues that need to be done through engineering studies. all of which have been submitted and more of which will be submitted uh in conjunction with a building permit and site plan as well. Um in terms of rear transition as I noted on the slide, it actually complies with the midrise guidelines which was confirmed in staff's report too. >> Thank you. And I know there was some work that was done to further address that and I'll be putting those questions to staff. >> Um in terms of how you see this fitting in this building, this proposal fitting into the wider community, can you talk to me a little bit about that? >> Certainly. So, the avenues contemplate this corridor transitioning to mid-rise. It has had mid-rise buildings for over 50 years, especially on the south side. Um, while the north side hasn't seen much development, it is a block that will see transition because it is avenues and so staff's report also anticipates that it will intensify over time with that. >> Thank you. I have some more questions for staff, but that's all for me. Thanks, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Any further questions of st of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. >> Thank you. Our next speaker is Aaron Gatoni. Uh Erin's online. Good morning, Erin. Is uh Steven Holiday, chair of the Tropical New York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Good morning. Yes. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes. Very well. Uh welcome to community council. You have five minutes. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning, councelor and deputy mayor Mley and members of community council. My name is Aaron Gaton and my family and I live on Albany Street which is immediately north to the proposed development and ours and our neighbors homes will back onto the site. Many of whom are in the room today and on the phone and our l littlest neighbor is in the front row. Um also I I'll really start by saying something clearly. Many in our community are not here to oppose development on Lakeshore and and quite the opposite. We understand the need for housing and we support growth, but when it's done appropriately and so what we're concerned about is this proposal at this scale in this specific location because right now it feels like a step change, not thoughtful planned growth. And so at a high level, this application you heard from um Mr. Finick. It's asking you to approve 12 stories plus mechanical hood, 47 meter building with roughly 172 units on the site that sits directly adjacent to a stable low-rise neighborhood. This site used to be a single family dwelling that was approved for 19 luxury town homes in the last approval process. And to enable this unit or to enable this new build, it requires a full redesation from neighborhoods to apartment neighborhoods. And and from our perspective, that's not minor. That's a fundamental shift in how this part of Lakeshore is planned to evolve. And so what we feel is missing from the broader planning context that would normally justify this kind of shift is there's been no avenue study, no secondary plan, no coordinated framework that says that this portion of Lakeshore is ready for this level of height and intensity. So what we're looking for at this specific site is to look at what we can do from a sight specific request for for apartment scale development without the planning work that usually comes with it. So that matters because this decision doesn't just affect this one site as Mr. Finneck talked about. If it's approved, it sets precedent that similar midblock properties can come forward with this type of request. So without an area plan, without infrastructure alignment, and without a clear transition strategy, that's difficult to see. And then there's what it actually means on the ground for the people who live here. This building directly backs on to homes on Albany Street, a street with over 40 children, families of all ages. Kids that go between houses and play. That is rare in Toronto. The height and massing create an abrupt transition, not a gradual one. There will be impacts to sunlight, privacy, and sky view streets which will be impacted such as He-Man which did not even receive a letters that their properties were going to be impacted. And so these aren't abstract planning concepts. This is how people live in their homes every day. There is also practical realities that don't feel resolved. The building of this size will generate real parking demand and that pressure will move on to surrounding streets and more importantly and not a simple construction site because of where the property is close to the lake with high groundwater table underground rivers running through. This requires deep excavation to go two levels below for parking below the water table. That introduces complexity and risk. And from a resident's perspective, it's not clear that those risks have been independently validated or that there's a strong enforcable protection in place for adjacent homes. And when you're talking about potential ground movement, which is in the hydraological study, or water impacts, that's not something that people take lightly and it affects our homes. I also want to say this. I recognize that the staff have recommended approval, but I think what's been done is we've interpreted the avenues policy quite broadly without fully waiting. The lack of supporting framework, the immediate neighborhood context, and the cumulative precedent that this will create because the avenues policy doesn't mean anything goes. The overdevelopment and disproportionality of this site and this specific project undermines the planning protections. This site requires development to be appropriately scaled and transitioned properly into neighborhoods and in that case we don't feel as though this has been achieved. So our ask is straightforward. We are asking you not to approve this in its current form and at minimum to defer and require a reduction in height and density more consistent with midrise form, a better transition to homes to the north, independent review of construction and groundwater risks, and a clear enforcable protections for the surrounding community. As a note, we did submit a petition uh that uh deputy mayor and uh councelor Mley had talked about, but we were refused to put it as part of the record due to it not being addressed to the atobico community council. This is not about stopping development. It's about making sure what gets built is appropriate, safe, and consistent to how this city is supposed to plan growth. >> Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. >> Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Uh we have one other speaker listed and that is Eric Gatoni. Eric is also online. Eric, good morning. It's Stephen Holidayiday from the Atobico York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay. Um good morning. I can hear you. And um so there's a bit of confusion because my wife was meant to speak and and not myself. So I think we're we're all set there. >> Okay. Well, thank you very much. I'll just ask are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. Uh, councelor Mley, go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the deputants for joining us today and for taking the uh initiative of talking to neighbors and and putting a petition forward. Um, I do want to get some clarification on the record uh related to this one. So, um to staff, uh what are the highlights of the changes that have been made with revisions uh with revised submission for this particular application >> uh through the chair? Thank you for the question. Uh my name is Daniel Colaminsky, senior planner reviewing this application. Uh from the original proposal which uh came in in in 2025, uh originally the the the building height measured to the top of the mechanical penthouse was approximately 50 m. Uh in the resubmission uh that's before the uh council today, uh the total height measured to the top of the mechanical penthouse is 47 m. Uh there was a large uh elevated rear parking garage structure uh that uh was in the entire rear yard of this proposal. In the original uh submission, it was about 6 m in total height. Uh that was eating into the rear separation of the midrise of the original mid-rise building. That garage has been removed. Uh and that area is now entirely free and clear of that uh structure and planned for for trees. Uh the mechanical penthouse structure was set back an additional 3 m from the 12th story for a total of 16 m of separation to the north property line. So an additional 3 m of setback. The sideyard setbacks of the front portion of the mid-rise building have been increased from 1.8 m to 2.5 m. Uh and the front yard setback of the building to Lakeshore uh plans for a minimum of six meters of sidewalk zone uh and as much as 7.5 meters and the whole building is consistent with the mid-rise design guidelines uh as well. >> We heard a little bit referenced about the Avenue policy and I know you've just come through leading the Lakeshore Avenue West study. Um correct me if I'm wrong, but this does fall slightly outside of the area for the Lakes Shore Boulevard West Study >> through the chair. That's correct. This is just east of the Lakeshore Boulevard West Avenue study. >> How are avenue policies then applied in this case? >> Through the chair, our avenues policies have evolved substantially in the last two years. In February of 2025, city council adopted brand new avenues policies that apply citywide. In this case, we have a neighborhood's designation on an avenue. And there uh there there are opportunities where appropriate uh for neighborhood designated lands to be converted to mixed use or apartment neighborhoods uh if the criteria of the site makes sense. Uh so in in this site for example with it being a deeped lot uh and surrounded by on the south side of Lakeshore other apartment neighborhoods designations uh and other forms of mid-rise buildings. City staff felt it was appropriate for this site to be redesated from neighborhoods to apartment neighborhoods and this is happening citywide in other parts of the city as well. >> Neighbors uh raised concerns about the hydrogeeological uh impacts and the report associated with this application. I put that question to um the uh prop the applicant as well. Uh and this does remain an ongoing issue of concern to surrounding neighbors. We are just a few um feet away from Lake Ontario. Can staff please provide a bit more of an explanation about um what's expected on this property and what uh protections uh are in place to ensure that there is that this is appropriately addressed and that there is no negative impacts to surrounding neighbors. >> Hello. Uh through the chair. Yeah, my name is Sean Ren. I'm the acting manager in development engineering. Uh so yeah for this development they are proposing dewatering of groundwater to lower the groundwater level uh for construction for the excavation and to build the foundation. Uh once that is constructed the intent is for it to be watertight below grade without a need for long-term or continuous deatering. Uh so that's what my team has reviewed at this point. uh through the site plan and building permit process. Uh you know they they would be required to uh or they they have required a hydrogeeological um consultant who would sign off that their report has been prepared in accordance with various provincial and municipal standards to mitigate impacts on surrounding properties. So safe to say there's a significant number of checks and balances and professionals who are uh well-versed in this area to ensure that whatever is proposed through not just this but detailed site plan is acceptable and will function well. Um on in practical terms if for god forbid there's a failure or there's issues what would typically be in place to um protect neighbors from any impacts from this particular property? Last question then a second round >> like insurance or you know is there any like what would come into play if our checks and balances fail and there was an issue related to flooding or water um in this property? >> Yes, through the chair. Yes, there are a number of checks and balances in place if something should happen. I unfortunately can't speak to that but I imagine yes, there would be insurance and other things in place that >> nature. Okay, I'm going to go for a second round when I when I can. Thanks, Mr. Chair. >> Questions from other members? >> I'll ask a couple. Uh did you need to continue with Mr. Okay. So, I'll ask a couple then uh to planning. I just wanted to go back to the discussion around avenues policies. So, we council passed OPA 7 78. So, that is uh that that says that avenues are going to change, but can anybody just go and build a mid-rise building today on that? Could someone walk me through what the current status is >> through through the chair? Uh there's certain areas across the city uh where they may be designated mixeduse areas and zoned commercial residential and there are certain locations where city council has adopted as of right mid-rise buildings, right? uh where you could uh go to the city with an application for a mid-rise building and go through a site plan control process >> perhaps committee of adjustment. Uh this isn't uh one of those kind of sites where you could do that. You have to go through uh the redesation process and resoning process for a mid-rise. >> Does this fall under OPA 778, which is the avenues policy review >> through the chair? Yes. >> Okay. But that's two parts is it not? There's a second part that occurs at the later stage that is the actual implementation the phase two is it not? >> Do I understand that incorrectly? >> Through through the chair phase two of uh OPA 778 and the avenues policy review is looking at a citywide uh uh concept of redesating lands that are neighborhoods sitting on avenues. uh that has taken place in wards 9 and 11 uh to date. That's where the main uh citywide work has been done. However, the the foundation has been established to say that redesating neighborhood lands to mixeduse areas or apartment neighborhoods may be appropriate, but it has to be done through a sight specific process like this one. What happens when the phase 2 work reaches this stretch of road or is it is it eventually going to occur on this stretch of road >> through the chair? I would have to defer to our colleagues in city planning who are leading the citywide work. >> Uh I don't know if we've got someone to answer that. >> Could could you just go over what happens in in stage two? I I through the chair I I could say that this is a this particular stretch of Lakeshore has neighborhood designated properties on an avenue. So it would make sense for city planning to look at this particular stretch to see if the redesations from neighborhoods uh to mixed use or apartment neighborhoods makes sense and uh that would be studied and looked at >> right >> as a part of that work when it comes to this ward in Atobico. >> That's what happened in wards 9 and 11 did it not? They took neighborhoods and they they changed them >> through the chair. That's correct. So there's a is it fair to say that there's a big work plan that's going on across the city to look at these stretches of roads? It's just that this particular component of Lakeshore Boulevard has not gone through that stage two >> through the chair. That's correct. The original recommendation was to look at the un the entire city >> uh and that was broken up ward by ward into smaller sections and that hasn't come to yet. Um the idea would be in the simplest sense once the stage two occurs somebody could build a building like this. Not saying that's exactly this but it could they could build a mid-rise building as of right and I think as you said they would go straight to site plan. There would be no consultation with the community. There would be no decision of council. It just the builder goes and goes through that work and then gets their building permit. Is that like a fair general summary >> through the chair? That would be fair if all the redesations and the resonings occur, then a mid-rise building uh could be permitted as of right and just go through site plan control. >> Now, just so I'm not confused, the city did some changes on major streets and they said that buildings up to 19 m tall and up to 60 units could be built as of right. Can that occur on this site >> through the chair? Yes. And looking at the context of this site there, the site is broken up into two lots. 2686 Lakeshore Boulevard West and 2688 Lakes Shore Boulevard West. The 2688 Lakeshore Boulevard West site would have the major streets uh apartment permissions for up to 19 meters in height and 7.5 meters of rear setback. So you could see uh the opportunity for a six-story building 19 meters tall on this site. >> Thank you. I have no further questions. Uh round two. Councelor Mley. >> Uh thank you Mr. Chair through you to uh planning staff. I'm just going to continue to follow a few of the lines of questions I already started with. um with respect to um the hydrogeeological sorry I just wanted to revisit that just um what are the requirements and I think it's really important to be clear about this what are the requirements for managing water impacts from a new development on adjacent properties kind of the question I already asked but in a little bit of a different way um so if you could clarify what are the requirements for managing water impacts from a new development on adjacent properties through the chair. Uh through de development engineering, we don't manage that. We really only manage whether or not they're discharging to the sewer system, but there are other provincial and municipal regulations in place. My team just doesn't handle that. >> Is there anyone here who can speak to that? Seeing none, I will move along. Thank you. Um again, this does continue to be an area of concern. We want to make sure that if this moves forward, it does so in a good way with minimal impact to the surrounding neighbors. One of the other issues of concern and was mentioned by our colleagues in planning is that there was previously an attempt to develop uh a different product on this site that was did not um was not successful and has sort of left it in a certain condition. There were also concerns related to potential illegal tree removal on that site. Uh we had asked staff to look into this. Can you tell us what community planning uh found? through the chair. Uh we looked at the original 2010 application for the three-story townouses. Uh there was a plan a landscape plan in place uh that showed a replanting of 18 total trees on site. Uh we also compared that to what's before us today and the current application does show on the landscape plan 19 trees to be uh planted which would be a net gain of one tree from the original proposal. I'm not as familiar with the infractions that might have been that might have happened uh back then. >> Okay. There was also some potential impact on trees in the rear yard and adjacent properties to the north. My understanding was the removal of the garage and the further sort of setting back towards the south of the property helped to address that. Can you confirm if there were uh trees that were saved or um injury saved from injury or removal as a result of that change of the rear yard garage >> through the chair? That that would be correct. And then finally, the question I just wanted to confirm as well was we know this site um there was a couple of properties that have been assembled uh in order to proceed with this. Um this second site that did still have um a residence in place had some tenants. Can you confirm that any potential tenant relocation or tenant support had been um followed up and due diligence completed on that >> through the chair? That that's correct. There is a our housing policy staff are working with the applicant on securing that tenants assistance plan. Uh so all those tenants will be uh accounted for. >> Thank you. Um why do you feel this why is staff giving us an approval report today? Why is this fitting into the context of the local community >> through the chair? I I believe that uh in in in speaking to some of the the evolving policies already for avenues, uh city staff have worked diligently with the applicant to ensure that the proposal is in keeping with policies and guidelines for mid-rise buildings that have been adopted by city council. Uh we've worked with the applicant to ensure that we can respect the appropriate rear transition to low-rise properties to the north. The building has been designed in terms of its massing and and articulations to limit the amount of shadowing that's cast to the north where the low-rise properties are. And we've uh worked to uh lessen the amount of atgrade use from an amenity perspective in the rear yard to further improve the the privacy concerns uh that have been raised from residents in the community. and we've been able to secure uh tree planting that's increased from the original proposal in 2010. Uh we're planning for a lot more people in this city. Avenues are targeted as a as a a place for growth. Uh we feel as though that this mid-rise building is designed in a way to take in account for the depth the the significant depth of this lot and uh also accounts for appropriate uh opportunities for improved streetscape uh in the front yard so that we have accessible sidewalks. >> I just have one quick question. Sorry, Daniel. I'm just going to jump in there. Um but I thank you for the um summary. I think this all highlights important work um that we're doing as a city. The last one was just a question about impacts of trans transit and and parking for example. Um can you talk about how the site is served um from trans from a transit standpoint uh and what the anticipated impact would be from any additional new residents here through the chair. Um there is uh transit service along Lakeshore in this area. I do not recall what the route number is, but there is transit late uh service along Lakeshore. >> 501 Long Branch. >> 501 Long Branch. Thank you. Um I'm not sure if there's any planned improvements in terms of transit in along this corridor. Uh I can look into it and get back to you, but I'm not sure offh hand. In terms of parking, I believe you mentioned uh an issue about parking. Um the current proposal complies with the citywide bylaw in terms of parking. Um they are proposing um based on my numbers here they are proposing sorry the my my mistake they are they require according to the new bylaw they require u zero minimum resident parking spaces and uh somewhere in the order of uh a maximum of sorry they didn't have it I don't have it here but oh well here it is so they they require A minimum of zero resident parking spaces and a maximum of 160 spaces are permitted under the new bylaw and they're proposing 89 residential spaces. Um based on the new bylaw, they they they meet the the minimum requirements uh and the maximum requirements of the bylaw. >> Thank you. That's all Mr. Chair. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any further questions members to speak? So, uh, I just wanted to make a comment on this. Uh, the avenues policy, uh, was something that I was very critical of, continue to be very critical of, and this is what happens when those things pass. Um, the second half of the work, as one of the speakers pointed out today, uh, isn't done. And so, this is a leading edge application. Um the sense I get from the planners and you know they haven't said so much exactly because it's not fair to speculate but you know this is likely one of those sites that would change uh when the time comes to designate those avenues. Um um I have uh a lot of concerns with the overall way that this policy is applied. I might know at the end of this, but I wanted to make the remark that by at least coming through the main process or the main route of a of um a resoning in an official plan, it helps uh the local council, councelor Mory and this community council have more control over that application. It just doesn't go and get automatically built. So, I I do want to recognize, you know, the the thinking that the speaker today talked about um you know, she lived nearby and she raised concerns and this sort of seems early, but we also have to be realistic and understand that it would be a matter of time and that while it may be a leading edge precedent, wait till the rest of the the policy comes through and changes the dynamic of the neighborhood. So, I I know council mor you've got a lot of work to do on this and and I know that you will and you've got control because of this report. Um I just think what we're seeing are objections on the general policy that council that council already passed and I think there's going to be more of these as more projects come along. Uh but thank you for the opportunity to speak about it and uh I wish um I wish everyone u to do the best they can with this report that's in front of them. I know it's difficult. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate your comments as always, and I want to say another thank you to the residents who joined us today, including the youngest one. We hope they'll stay engaged in civic life for a long time to come. Um, but also to, um, the deputants, uh, Eric and Aaron, who took the lead on a petition engaging with our local community to talk about the potential impacts of this particular application on the neighborhood. uh we have been in touch over the year and we've been taking those concerns forward in discussions with colleagues in planning as well as as they've worked through this application. We heard about some of the um up upgrades or resubmission that came through as a result of this application including addressing the rear yard impacts including being considerate of the local trees, the buffering, the privacy concerns, the setbacks. Um we know that this city is set for growth. We've got a provincial mandate hanging over us to facilitate growth in our communities. And I believe that growth should go where it is suited, where there is infrastructure and protect for the core of our single family neighborhoods by building out gentle density and a gentle intensification along avenues and along um areas where there is transit. We know we've all sat in congestion for quite some time the last number of years certainly postcoid and we cannot continue to be a car centric community in Atobbico. While we all many of us will still continue to have need of those cars, as our community goes grows and new residents come to call it home, we're all going to have to figure out navigating it in a slightly different way. Because if the growth we're set for, which is 70,000 new units proposed or in the pipeline just in Atobico Lake Shore and every one of those one and a half individuals per each unit has a car, we're not going to be moving through this community in a good way. So, this council is very focused on investing in transit in making sure that our systems are reliable and consistent. We've got incredible um civil servants at the TTC, for example, who keep those systems running and operating every day. And we want to continue to invest in the types of things that are going to make our cities um uh sustainable into the future. Um and growing in spaces where it can accommodate that is what that looks like. We're also aware of how this impacts the local community and I do want to share and we'll have an update in an upcoming newsletter that we were able to secure an expansion of parkland just south of this site a little bit southwest of the site and so more details to come on that but we know that the quality of life and the ways in which we interact with our green spaces and atobico lakes shore really matters and those are things that we're working hard to protect and grow as the community um grows as well. So, I will be moving the staff recommendations here today, and I'm going to continue to work uh with colleagues and the local community on uh additional motions to address site plan review and uh community benefit charges where we'd like to allocate those in the local community as it comes through the council process in a number an additional number of weeks. Um but we do appreciate the need to move forward here. The site has been left derelictked. uh one half of the site has been left derelik for quite some time and that's not a good state or condition for our community. Um I do believe that we need to continue to advance the policies that we're supporting here um and doing that ideally collaboratively um respectfully uh as good neighbors as new applications come forward. So, with thanks um to everybody involved and with a commitment to continuing to do the work to build out our community in a good and complete way, uh I will be moving the staff recommendations. >> Anyone else to speak? Seeing none, all those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Our next item is EY 32.239 Newcastle Street official plan and zoning bylaw amendment application decision report. We have a registered speaker that is Lori Payne. Is Lori here? Welcome to the Atobbico York Community Council. >> Good morning, council. Good morning. >> Um, my name is Lori Payne, COO and EVP of development for OGDC. OGDC is the applicant for the development proposed at 39 Newcastle. We support city staff's recommendations as set out in EUI 32.2. too. We know your agenda is very full today, so my remarks will be very brief, but I'm happy to answer questions. The proposed development at 399 Newcastle implements the city's vision for the area around the Mimiko GO station and it says set out in the Mimiko Judson secondary plan. In particular, it provides an active streetcape along Newcastle and Windsor streets. It establishes critical segments of the new cycle route through the area and it provides a new gateway to the GO station with new public open space and new retail. We recognize that there have been development proposals for this area that have not been successful. We know that the community is eager to see transitoriented development take place around Meimco GO station. We believe the development proposal before you is a critical step towards the revitalization of the area. Lastly, we would like to thank councelor Mley and city staff for the effort they have put into addressing the development challenges of this site and moving the plan forward. It has been a smooth and productive process and the input of staff, the counselor and the community have made the plan better. We would also like to thank the local community association and community members for their feedback, enthusiasm, and the spirit of collaboration they brought to the process. We look forward to working together as we move to the next steps. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Uh Kesser Morley has a question. >> Thank you. Thank you for being with us, Lori. I just wanted to pick up on that last point you made about the neighbors and the local residents association, the local BIA and others. Um, this has been a site as you know and you mentioned in your remarks that has really been slow to start and a number of frankly starts and stops uh right around the Mimoko in a transit oriented community. What has the nature of your conversations been like with some of the surrounding stakeholders uh in terms of their um their perspectives on this application? We've had very positive communications with the community. Uh they love their community. They're passionate about it. Um we've had for a number of points and feedback provided to us that actually made the plan better. One of the things we heard for instance is that they wanted to make sure the access to the GO station was kept as smooth and easy as possible. So, we moved all our car access away from the GO station entrance and replaced that with a public open space and new retail. So, as I said, I think the community input has made the plan better and we hope that they will continue to be involved as we move forward. >> Thank you. And that's it for me, Mr. Chair. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any further questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. I'll ask if there's any other speakers to this item. Seeing none, questions of staff. Uh, councelor Moley. >> Thank you. Just one quick one um to staff on this one. Can you explain why there's less non-residential space in the proposal than expected? Uh and does community planning support the amount of non-res space that we do see included in the final submission >> uh through the chair. Thank you for the question, De Moley. Um yes, so there is a reduction in the non-residential requirement as what was originally envisioned in the Meico Judson secondary plan. Um, so under the secondary plan, there was a requirement for 2350 square meters of uh non-residential uses for a maximum of 62,700 square meters of residential GFA. What we're securing in the bylaw today is 750 m of non-residential GFA for a maximum of 105,000 square meters of residential GFA. Um through the review of the application, staff have encouraged the applicant to increase the non-residential provision and this did result in an increase of the non-residential provision from 500 square meters in the first submission to 750 m in uh the second submission. We know that in this particular uh local area, there's currently a high demand for retail spaces with vacancy rates of 0.6%. So the proposed retail space uh will help address this need in the area. um the applicant really did maximize the amount of space, the ground floor space that's dedicated to retail. Um considering that, you know, there's a need for residential accesses to the sites. Um so really the the only other viable option to increase um the non-residential provision would be through secondstory non-residential uses, which in the current market are very difficult to uh to try to facilitate within a proposal. uh they did submit a non-residential market feasibility memorandum that that confirmed uh this as well the difficulty of providing these seconds story retail um spaces or or other non-residential spaces on the second story. So what we've done is we've secured a minimum in this in the zoning bylaw which is 750 square meters. Um and we think that that you know these retail uses are good quality located next to the mimical go station and along Newcastle Street which will be introducing new retail spaces um which will serve the future residents while contributing to the establishment of complete communities. >> Fantastic. Thank you for that. Um can you also just on that note of complete communities there are a couple of elements of this um development proposal that aligns with wider city building um uh vision and um pieces of work that we've sort of set out in terms of connectivity and those pieces. Can you highlight what this proposal will bring to help build out some of those other um local connection points? >> Absolutely. Through the chair. Um so there's a few aspects of the proposal that help um I guess achieve the visions of the Mimico Jetson secondary plan. I think firstly is uh as Lori was mentioning earlier the access to the the Mimiko GO station. Windsor Street that stretch of Windsor Street specifically south of Newcastle Street was envisioned um as sort of the gateway to the Mimiko uh go station. Um so it was envisioned as a as a pedestrian focused area. we were able to remove the access off of Windsor Street, consolidating it on Newcastle, which provides a nice gateway to the Mimiko GO station. Um, and as well as providing a pop space uh along Windsor Street, which would help uh you know, facilitate future residents to uh to access and meet meet with each other before accessing uh the Mimico station. Uh in terms of um pushing along the policies from the Mimiko Judson secondary plan for transportation, uh the applicant did did include the Mimiko Judson secondary plan, which is essentially a birectional cycling lane that'll run uh within the the public rightway along Newcastle Street and uh south along Windsor Street towards um the Mimiko GO station. >> Thank you. I'll leave it there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Uh any other questions of staff? Seeing none, members wishing to speak. Council Morley, go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the patience of my colleagues this morning. Um, I do want to um just speak on this application and it is um something we are glad to see moving forward. Um I will be moving the staff recommendations here and as was mentioned, there are a number of city policies that have been established for this area that have not seen any significant starts to date. It's been over a decade in the Mimiko community surrounding Mimiko GO station which is higher order transit which is well served. We have some issues with parking. We know we're working through those but it is a you know an accessibility as well. Um but we do know that this is a really really important higher order transit connection point and it has been visioned for quite some time as a high-rise transit oriented community. Um this has been again a really frustrating corner uh triangle, the Mimikco triangle for the community because of the number of starts and stops uh and the lack of frankly progress that we've seen on any site um to really bring the visions that have been long set in place um to fruition for our community. So we're glad to see that this application has come to a place with support from staff and the local community to move forward. Uh we appreciate some of the very cons considerations that were highlighted by my colleague in planning um that really helped to bring to life some of the connection points and vision for how this community can grow in a good way. Um bring in new residents, get them connected to transit immediately uh lessen the need for car dependency, but make sure that people have good quality homes uh in here in our community where they can be supported by infrastructure. So I am um moving staff recommendations and I hope my colleagues will support um that. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Anyone else to speak on this item? Seeing none, all those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Our next item is EY 32.3 5500 Dundas Street West zoning by amendment application. Uh we have speakers on this item. Our first speaker is Rishaba Kumar. Is Rishaba here or online? Good morning uh Rashaba. It's Stephen Holidayiday from the Utopbokco York Community Council. Can you hear me? >> Yes. Good morning. >> Great. We can hear you well. You've got five minutes. Please go ahead. >> Thank you. Uh, good morning. My name is Rashad Kumar and I live directly north of the site on Silver Hill Drive. So, I recognize that this site is is an avenue designation and that growth is anticipated along Dundas. My concern is not with growth itself, but my concern is more whether the specific build form proposed provides appropriate transition to the homes directly north of the site. The staff and applicant rely on the fourstory north edge like a podium setbacks and stepbacks which is relevant to that four-story north edge. And these are the predominantly the the methods used. But I think the transition should also be judged on the full built form the residents uh in our neighborhood will live beside and not just the first few stories. So the four fourstory podium does not make the 14 and the 16 story mass just behind it disappear. So extrapolating that there's further concern around the shadow piece and I understand a comparison to a mid-rise guideline massing it's it shows that it's not adverse compared to that but it does not change the practical reality uh of persistent loss of daylight and then also irreversible loss of privacy for homes right above right on the north side. So to me this is definitely not suggestive of a gradual transition. It implies like it's a tower scale uh mid-rise the highest mid-rise tower scale built right beside one and two story homes. So reinforcing the point around the transition does not seem appropriate. So I respectfully ask the council to uh not approve in its this proposal in its current form and then require appropriate revisions to soften that me and provide substantial meaningful transition along the north edge. Um few of the measures I think you've spoken about it but to reinforce the point would be uh a reduced height at the interface substantially more landscaping buffer on the north uh edge and redistribution of the mass which is the tallest mass um of the towers further towards Dendas. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Ryan Doherty from Bousefields. Ryan Ryan is here. >> Uh, good morning. You've got five minutes. >> Good morning. I do have a presentation, so I'm just going to >> just take a second to make sure that's connected properly. Wonderful. Thank you for giving me a moment. Uh my name is Ryan Dhy. I'm a land use planner with Bouse Fields. uh here on behalf of the applicant uh First Capital, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. Um as well, I want to thank staff for their efforts on this application and we are in support of the recommendations to approve. Um this site is located on the north side of Dundas Street West near Highway 427. Uh the site is located just over 800 meters from the Kipling Transit Hub. It's served by several local bus routes and is along the planned Dundas BRT. The site occupies the block between Paul Drive and Billingham Road. It's considerably large, about one hectare in size. It has a frontage of 170 meters and a depth of about 54 m. It is currently occupied by a vehicle dealership. This site is located along an avenue and is designated mixeduse areas in the official plan. These are areas for growth with predominantly mid-rise buildings. The proposal is for two buildings of 14 and 16 stories, each with a four to five story podium. A pops is proposed at the corner of Dundas and Billingham, and an internal pedestrian courtyard is proposed between the two buildings that is also intended to be publicly accessible. The proposal will significantly enhance the condition and safety of each streetscape, which is currently quite autodominated. Um the buildings are set back about 6 mters from Billingham and Paulart uh and up to 10 meters along Dundas Street West. So creating considerably large landscape frontages. Um there is a vehicle driveway and 2.5 m landscape buffer located to the rear. Overall the proposal includes about 10,000 square ft of ATRA retail space uh and about 40% two and threebedroom units. The built form here has been considered very carefully with respect to the city's mid-rise design guidelines. The building heights are proportionate to the width of Dundas Street West, which has a right-of-way width that ranges of about up to 41 m. When you pair that with the proposed front yard setbacks, the the perceived right-of-way width of of Dundas is about 45 to 50 m. To the rear, the base buildings are set back 12 to 13 meters from the north lot line with the upper elements set back 20 m or greater, about the width of a typical local street. By comparison, the city's mid-rise guidelines would require 7.5 m for the base element and 10 m above for the upper element. That's the blue line here. About half of what is proposed in this case. The buildings also provide a 20 meter separation distance between the two buildings and are stepped back on all sides, which is in accordance with the city's guidelines. Here's an elevation view illustrating the proposed rear yard setback. Again, compared to the mid-rise guidelines, which is the blue line, the proposal is providing about double the recommended rear setback. Um, in addition, uh, compared to the proposal, the guidelines would actually allow for the base elements to be taller, 20 m, and again, situated closer to that rear lot line. Here is a conceptual rear section of that driveway area. Um, as a means to help mitigate overlook, the proposal does provide a 2.5 m rear landscape buffer. The intention is to provide taller plantings in that area to help provide screening for the adjacent rear yards. And this is something that will be further explored at site plan control. The bulk of the rear landscape strip is intended to be occupied by about 13 oak trees again to provide screening. And as an additional privacy measure, the proposal does restrict projecting balconies along the north faces of the buildings. Um, we have looked at shadowing really closely with respect to this application. Um, and with respect to the city's mid-rise guidelines. On the left is the proposal. On the right is a uh mid-rise guidelines massing. Um, and we've taken some snapshots throughout the day. Um, in both cases, shadowing is predominantly limited to the properties along the south side of Silver Hill and west side of Paul. Um, and what this study demonstrates is that the difference between shadowing from the proposal and what would be supported through the mid-rise guidelines is is marginal. Um, there are somewhat greater shadows from the proposal in the early morning. However, by the afternoon, shadows from the proposal actually move off the low-rise properties earlier than what the mid-rise guidelines would allow. And again, that's because of that additional separation distance that's provided. So overall, we think this is a good application. We think it achieves the city's objectives for its avenues. We think it's appropriate given the configuration of the site. Um we acknowledge the concerns raised by neighboring residents and understand that development does come with its impacts. Um however, for a rapidly growing city, we need to ensure that we are appropriately optimizing the use of our avenues. Thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Uh, Cer Mley, >> thank you for the submission and I did want to dig in a little bit more because I think the shadow impacts really are some of the most um challenging aspect, one of the most challenging aspects of this file for the neighboring community. Uh, and understandably so, we saw what a significant impact and so I just wanted to dig in a little bit further about the level of consideration and review that you did in terms of looking at alternative amassing. We heard from the first deputent about a reduction in height at the interface. I'm not sure what that means, but maybe you as a as an expert might know. Um, as well as you you identified some landscaping, but can you just talk to us a little bit more about what considerations went into looking at alternative massing for this building in consideration of the neighbors to the to the north? >> Yeah. So, a lot of consideration did did go into that effect. We had an extensive pre-application consultation process with city staff where there were a number of different massing options that were um worked through. Um again, this site is unique from other sites in that it has that significant depth where you can get a taller massing while providing a significant setback from Dundas while also significantly exceeding the the mid-rise guidelines. So, um, that was one of the key considerations is understanding these buildings are on the north side of the street. Quite frankly, any mid-rise building is going to cause shadow on those properties. And so, it's how can we move the massing as close to Dundas as possible while still achieving the city's public realm objectives. >> And can you confirm that you've maxed out the ability to set closest to Dundas as possible? It may be possible to shift the buildings slightly closer, but again, we want to make sure we're achieving the city's public realm objectives. There's also the planned BRT that's coming through here. It's unknown what type of land takings might be needed for that. What additional opportunities will remain for the local community and the local counselor's office to um have a say with respect to site plan and some of the other final um pieces of this application that will be impacting and experienced by the local residents. >> Yeah. Well, there's there's of course the construction mitigation aspect. We will be required to submit a construction management plan. The applicant will have to work with your office as well as the the local community to make sure that those impacts are mitigated. Um I think we would like to hear about from the community about where the community benefits contribution could go towards um how to approp what what goes in that landscape buffer. There's some servicing considerations we're working through. So um those are all things that we we'd love to hear from yourself as well as from the community on. >> Thank you. Um last quick one. Sorry I don't see the timer up. I'm okay for time. Thank you. Um is just with respect to the north facing balconies. Um that was an important consideration in terms of the privacy in the overlook. Um can you confirm if that was uh an adjustment made in consideration of the local community to the north? >> Yes. So that was uh something that came following the community consultation meeting which I believe we had back in March. Um and so when um we were drafting the bylaw with community planning staff, it was a suggestion that we felt was good to include in the bylaw. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll leave it there. >> Thank you. Our next speaker is uh Priya Fernandez. Is Priya here or online? Okay. Our next speaker is Lee Defonso. Is Lee is online. Good morning, Lee. It's Stephen Holiday from the community council. Can you hear me? Okay. Lee, if you can hear me, we cannot hear you. >> Good morning. >> Good morning, Lee. Welcome. You've got five minutes. >> Thank you. Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the to the other members of the council. Um, as a resident of 117 Silver Hill, I did attend the February 26th meeting. We as a community were over 50 of us were on it voicing our concerns about this development. And I want to start by saying I am not opposed to development. I am opposed to a development that does not respect our current community. It is a long-standing community in Atobico with many single family low-rise bungalow homes. We are we are not happy with this development. We ask that you do not approve the zoning change. We ask that you look at other properties within that area. The south side of Dundas would be a perfect opportunity looking at the current developments that are happening close to Kipling subway station and the one that's developing at uh Shoring Cliff and Dundas. We want our community to stay the same. We have huge concerns about the traffic, the parking, and to be perfectly honest, the water table. This past weekend was very clear that the water table in this neighborhood is not conducive to a 14story and a 16story building. All of our backyards are flooded with just rain. The gullies are full. And when we approached this at the at the community meeting, it was like, "Oh, no, don't worry. We'll shore it up." I have huge worries. This is a firsttime development encroaching on a very significant neighborhood. We are concerned this development does not fit our community. It is not a critical development to us. Can the city can First capital find a different space to build this this building? That is my question. Uh, thank you for your deputation. Are there any questions of the speaker? Councelor Mley, go ahead. Hi, Lee. Thanks for joining us. Thank you for your deputation today and for speaking up on behalf of the neighborhood. Uh, I just wanted to address your um proposal that a different space is sought. Do you appreciate that this is um not a city-led initiative? It's not a city project, that this is a private property. who owns this particular parcel of land who's who's looking to reinvision what the future of this land looks like. >> Yes, I do app I do appreciate that and I I don't understand why they would pick a property that is going to completely impact this neighborhood. >> Yeah. >> First Capital, I know, I've looked it up, it's big. Why can't they purchase a land somewhere else? There's the property directly south, Honeyale Mall, uh that was supposed to be redeveloped. Why is it not being chosen? To be honest, first I don't know if First Capital has owned this land the whole time, but the original plan because I've lived in this neighborhood for 26 years. I've been an owner for 26 years. And I will be honest and tell you, I picked this neighborhood because I don't want to live and raise a family and live my life around high-rise homes. If I high-rise buildings, if I wanted to, I'll live downtown because I work downtown. I want to live in a community that is a community. And this is not going to be a community. The original plan for this site way back, I think it was probably about 20 years ago, was to build town homes that were high-end town homes and not exceeding our current um our current homes. Basically, what happened to that plan? Because that was well accepted by the community. >> Yeah, thanks so much, Lee. I'll address some of those pieces in my remarks and again really appreciate you taking the time today. >> Thanks, Mr. Thank you. Our next speaker is John Black. Is John here or online? >> Great. Welcome, John. Uh, please come on up to the front. You have five minutes. Please go ahead. >> Good morning. I'll be very brief. Um I'm a resident on uh Polart and um all I can say is um the 16story ratio compared to one-story buildings. Visualize a 16story building. Visualize the wall and uh a one-story house. It's uh maybe two feet. There's um there's a setback and I think the the ratio is is ridiculous. It's it's it's crazy. I'm not a planner, but I I see um absurd absurdity when I see it. 16 to one. That's my presentation. I obviously think it's 16 stories is too high. What's what's suitable? Maybe eight. I don't know. I'm not a planner, but but planners, uh, do your thing. Thank you. Sorry, I have to squint on this because our next speaker is uh Shanty K uh Cra. Sorry, is Shanti's online? Um, welcome to the Utopbico York Community Council. Shanty, it's Steven Holiday. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes, I can hear you. Uh, please. I made yeah my major question is uh about the water table too like now when the the construction is done and they will have concrete all around for the parking and for the uh transportation. So where is the water then going how are they going to manage that water rainwater from there it's going to come into the neighboring houses. So as it is we have the flooding issue and if this water is also flowing into our neighborhood then that's going to be a major concern for all the houses so and the neighbors. So that's one concern. The second part is the traffic. Uh so the traffic where the Polehard Drive and the Billingham road my house is facing the Billingham road. It's a narrow road. It's a narrow street and now if they are having the um the entry into the U how building through Billingham then how is the traffic managed because that's going to be a hell lot of a traffic that's going to come in and out of that and sometime and we also have a public transport there and sometimes we have like four uh buses alting there to get the people up and down into the bus and then we have no choice but to wait for all those four buses to pass and then we get into Dunder Street. So that's a major concern about the traffic part. Also the parking the parking will overflow to the neighboring houses. So that doesn't keep us safe from the strangers and there'll be a lot of traffic. What is the alternative? Are they for the parking uh facility that they're providing for the um the shoppers and the uh residential visitors, the guests because the parking they have is just not sufficient. If that's a commercial building coming in, that's absolutely not sufficient at all. So that's the second concern I have. And uh the third thing is is this all taken care where is the transformer for the power supply going to be in the building closer to the fence of the neighboring houses or is it towards the dangers because that space is not enough. So where is that going to place? So those are the few questions I really wanted to be answered. >> Thank you. And just before I check if there's any questions from my colleagues, um I just wanted to thank you for your deputation but let you know that our procedure doesn't allow us to answer your questions. But I know uh your counselor uh deputy mayor Moley was listening very carefully and hopefully you'll have an opportunity to connect or some of those questions may get answered today in our community council process. So with that any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Uh, I will check one more time. Um, >> was it Lee Defonso that we were missing? Is Lee available? >> I'm sorry if I've got that wrong. Pria Fernandez. Is Priya's not online? Okay. Anyone else uh to speak on this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. >> Thank you. >> Mley, go ahead. >> I know it's a long morning. Councelor Netta, I I'll do my best to go through quickly. Um, thank you to staff. I wanted to put some of the questions that we heard from the local community and to you all. Um, the first one was related to transition concerns. Um, that came across almost across the board um, from all of the deputants and certainly in a lot of the conversations I've had with local residents about the concerns related to that transition. Can you talk to us about what um work was done and to address the transition opportunities on this uh file and whether uh that was an exhaustive process and alternatives were reviewed >> through you Mr. Chair. Public concerns raised during the community consultation meeting assisted us in determining what performance standards would be secured in the draftba including matters of transition and built form. Um this also included revisions that were secured post CCM. Um firstly a height reduction of 2.9 meters to each building was secured to generally align the building heights with the perceived rightaway width achieving that 1:1 ratio we look for. Generous setbacks of up to 24.6 m to the low-rise neighborhood were also secured and that vastly exceeds the 10 meters um contemplated under the council adopted mid-rise guidelines update. Additionally, as explained further, um balcony restrictions were also secured in order to reduce overlook and that uh perception of bulkiness and minimum separation distances were also secured between buildings as well to ensure that the bulkiness was also reduced. Um in addition to that, in terms of transition, there were also been restrictions added to the location and size of both mechanical penous. So a number of revisions were secured in response to uh concerns from the public with respect to massing and transition. >> Thank you. My second question is with respect to traffic and parking impacts. If you could give us a summary of what the um proposal will um is proposing related to those issues. Thank you. Are we able to move the other mic over >> through the chair? There you go. >> Thanks. >> So, uh, I have the parking numbers in front of me right now for this one. So for for this proposal they are proposing a total of 305 parking spaces which includes 271 resident spaces and 34 visitor spaces. Um the requirement for resident spaces as I'm sure you're aware counselor is zero as a minimum and uh 479 as a maximum. Um the visitor spaces they are complying with the minimum requirements. So overall uh the site is complying with the with the minimum maximum requirements of the citywide uh zoning bylaw. >> Great. And we did hear from the applicant that there are largely not largely 40% are familysized units. Um so we do expect that that will be a good need and having the parking provision on site will help to um uh address or mitigate the potential impact for the surrounding community. Is that a fair assessment? >> Through the chair I would say yes. Um, further to that, in terms of the traffic um, impacts themselves, are there proposal entry or exit onto some of the smaller surrounding communities or is that entry and exit specifically off of Dundas >> through the chair? There there is no access proposed for this development through Dundas. Um, there is an access driveway that's proposed off Billingham Road. Um it is anticipated that most of the traffic that will uh access the site will use the the major roads to get to and from the site rather than sort of wind their way through through uh the adjacent residential community. Uh that said, um I just want to iterate that uh the proposal is expected to generate somewhere in the order of 150 two-way trips or less during the AM and PM peak hours, which is a little bit more than two vehicles per minute on average. >> That was going to be my next question in terms of the numbers that we're anticipating. So, thank you for jumping to that. I appreciate it. Um yeah, I think just as a final uh question here in my last 30 seconds is can staff provide a summary as to why this is being suggested as an approval despite some of the um limitations and concerns we've heard raised today uh how this aligns with our vision for city building going forward. So very quickly overall all of the uh policies are conformed with with respect to the massing and the built form and when it comes to an impact perspective predominantly when it comes to shadow impact staff are satisfied that the proposed shadow impact conforms with the site and area specific policy. In terms of practical on the ground impacts, the proposed shadow is either consistent with or performs better than the level of acceptable shadow impact that's contemplated by council in their adopted mid-rise guidelines. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Those are all my questions. >> Thank you. Uh any other questions of staff, members wishing to speak? Councelor Mley, go ahead. >> Um thank you, Mr. Chair. And uh it feels like it's all at Tobico Lake all the time in this committee, but um this is one of the large proposals that we've been working really uh closely with our planning staff as well as the local community has expressed significant frustrations related to the impacts here. We know that residents in Atobbico Lakeshore are feeling um stressed about the level of growth and change that is being that is at our doorstep essentially and that we are being required to navigate and those are that's that's just real. Um, it's very difficult when you move to a community and you appreciate the blue skies and the sunshine that we are afforded here and many of us have chosen to call this place home because we do not want to live in a high-rise concrete jungle uh which we know is largely characteristic of the downtown. That being said, our community is required to absorb significant growth and we are really working hard here as a council to ensure that that growth is being situated in areas that can support it. um where the impact to existing stable local communities is mitigated and minimized as much as possible and wherever possible as well. That new development represents a benefit to the local community. whether it's streetscape upgrades, um additional pop spaces, publicly owned, privately, privately owned, publicly accessible outdoor spaces, wider sidewalks, better infrastructure, and overall um a growing community that is complete and connected and serves everybody's needs. That's really the work that we are seized with and we work hard to do every day. It is very difficult to get to a perfect outcome where everybody's happy. You've come to learn that that is just not possible in this work. Um but we do have to be consistent in applying the policies um and the guidelines that we are subject to along with doing our best to address community voice. So securing for example the restriction of balcony on the north side, working closely with planning staff to address and try our absolute best to work that transition to a generous setbacks versus the bare minimums. Um those are some of the areas where we continue to have some ability to influence um how these applications are shaped and we take that work seriously and we work hard at it. Uh again, it's still not going to unfortunately address some of the very real concerns related to new shadow impacts to those neighbors immediately north. Uh and I do regret that. However, this is a supportable application. I will be moving the staff recommendations to support it. uh with thanks again to the local community for their patience and their participation in the process. >> Thank you counselor. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none, all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Our next item is EY 32.4 1243 1243 Islington Avenue. A zoning bylaw amendment application decision report. Uh we have registered speakers. Our first speaker is Norma Inch. Is Norma here? Okay. >> Would someone please help me with the microphone? >> Thank you. Just Norman, if you just if I could just get some order in the chamber. Thank you. >> Uh, welcome to community council. Uh, you've got five minutes. Please proceed. >> Can you hear me? >> Very well. Thank you. >> My name is Norma Inch and I live at two present. The first thing I want to address is the impact this building will have on the residents of this area. I would like to point out that the regular censuses have for years shown that itico center and itbico lakeshore have the highest percentage of seniors than any other ridings in the city. Certainly this is true of the area that covers the lower part of itico center and the upper part of itico lakes shore. As people age they are less mobile, have more health problems and rely more on medical services. However, the developer is proposing to tear down a highly functional medical building that houses all types of doctors, dentists, a life lab, x-ray and ultrasound services, and a pharmacy. To have these within walking distance is not a luxury, but for many of us, it is a necessity, and the proposed building is only condos, and no consideration has been made to install even a few offices on the main floor. When the developer made his presentation at a log me login meeting earlier this year, he made a great fuss of the shadow surveys he'd done to show how little impact the loss of life would be for present residents. His shadow surveys went as far as Lincoln had done. Yet no survey was presented for those closest and most impacted. The condo buildings at one and two Labber foil and one Lund and the apartment building at 8 Lmond. Very interesting. I think I can guess why these were not forthcoming. Can you on council? The small area is highly congested already with cars, bicycles, and pedestrians. As anyone who spends any time around here would know, we residents fought very hard. He's you're taking my time. I can't read it. Taking my time. Okay. >> We residents fought very hard to get stop signs halfway down Aba Cresant so that the residents could safely cross the road. Abore Cresant one block north of Blure Street which runs from Islington Avenue to Blure Street has always been used as a cutoff to avoid the traffic lights at the corner of Blur and Islington. I can't even imagine what it will be like with all these extra cars and pedestrians and p and wi people whizzing by on bikes some of whom I'm sure will use the sidewalks to get to their destination faster. And I also can't imagine how difficult it will be to cross the road safely. The proposed monstrosity of a building which looks as attractive as a stick of celery is supposed to be 61 stories high. 61 stories and contain over 700 condos of very small square footage. Somehow they're going to be all manner of condos from studio to threebedroom. The overcrowding for the poor residents will be horrific. In addition to that, there will only be four elevators. Good luck to anyone getting an elevator if you live on one of the upper floors. And when you finally get to ground level, don't expect to access the subway, which although coming from the end of the line Kipling, is frequently nearly full before it reaches Islington during the rush hour. The platforms will be overcrowded and people will be waiting all the way up the stairs to get down there. If they own a car, there are only 89 parking spots and nine visitor spots for them, but 540 bicycle spots. How many bike riders can one small area accommodate? It will be a miserable place to live. and Tom Riley Park presently a place of tranquility will be overwhelmed and the ecology ecology destroyed. Now let's talk about the problems for everyone in the area present and future. The hydro, water and sewage will be overwhelmed. The school and day nurseries who which are ever already overcrowded. Where are all these new children going to go? Even more overloaded will be police, ambulance, and fire services. Just imagine what will happen if there's a fire in the building. It'll be a fire trap. The ladders don't go up that high, and people will die either from smoke inhilation or being trampled as everyone tries to run down the concrete stairs. Finally, what is the point of building more condos when the ones already building built are standing empty? Cloverdale Mall just pulled out of their proposed condo towers over a new mall because of the lack of interest. I believe that in order to get financial backing, you need something like 75% occupancy rate. This won't happen anytime soon. >> Norma, could you wrap up? >> The Yes. the developer will pull out and we residents will be left with a building that has been demolished to make way for a useless eyes of a deserted building site. Thank you. >> Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Anne Butler. Welcome in. You've got five minutes. Please begin. >> Thank you. I'm a little taller than Norma. >> Oh, will this stay up? Okay. >> Sorry. And just just bend that little last bit. >> Great. >> Or we won't hear you. >> I'm usually heard. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good morning. My name is Anne Butler. I have lived at two Everfall Crescent since two uh 2003 23 years. Could I just ask for a show of hands? How many of you have ever walked Abberall Crescent? Yay. Well, maybe I'll meet you sometime. We haven't up to now. I would like to address three items today concerning the proposed resoning of 1243 Islington Avenue. one density of project and I'm really delighted to hear about the gentle uh intensity that you propose uh the density of the project the Islington subway project going hand in hand and the Abberall neighborhood itself each of these items presently has or will have a huge effect on the new proposal and in particular the management of these three items should have become very important there was some coordin ation that probably should have been happening. Density of the project. The Blur Kipling project from Islington Station to Kipling. This project is going ahead. The project includes the new Atobico River Center. You will have a new home, a new city park, and 2700 new homes. These lands are very unlike the abberafoil present. Most of the discussion and appeals here today were to speak about the gentle um the gentle intensifying of Toronto and going for single home neighborhoods. The proposal of a 61tory building is being foisted on an already dense Abberafoil neighborhood. three condo buildings, one apartment building, one daycare with outside gardens facing the street, and three commercial towers. This will be an onslaught on the safety, the accessibility, and the neighborhood um of Abberfoil, already a residential and commercially mixed community. I emphasized management should have been crucial. The second point I wanted to point out is the Islington subway project. We are living through the Isling subway project. We were approached by TTC and had a neighborhood meeting 20 years ago. We are very glad to see it coming. This station presently has no elevators or escalators. Let me read you the Toronto city accessibility policy online and still in effect. The city of Toronto's accessibility complies with the provincial accessibility. Oh, Mr. Ford is catching on. It ensures that city services, employment, facilities, and public spaces are inclusive, barrierfree, and designed to respect the dignity and independence of individuals with disabilities. And to add to Norma and myself or the addition of senior years, Abberfoil is not downtown. Hate to tell you, but we ain't there yet. Abberfall is full and very busy. Trucks are unloading. Buses are going through day and night. A second here. Am I here? Why has this subway rebuild not been coordinated with the Blur Kipling project? There was one crosswalk, a stop sign and uh and two stop signs and two walks. The uh commercial center neighbor across from us refused to participate in a four-way stop at the time that we and and Abberfall and Lmond were able to get this one thing through too. the Aberul neighborhood itself throughout these dueling products projects safety has become a huge concern. We have seen little and I should add that we're watching these dual projects at the same time and it's all going through the corner of Blur and Islington. The safety has become a huge concern. We have seen little or no traffic police traffic or police throughout all of this. Each side of Abberfoil is marked no standing both sides of the street. And yet for many years and certainly in this past year we have seen no police or parking folks, cars, trucks, etc. are parked there all day. There was nobody, no direction of the many delivery trucks. >> May I ask you to wrap up please? >> Okay. Get to this. I thank you for your attention today. Uh Mr. Anthony Sosia, I believe the town planner is not present. To him, to the counselors of Atobbico York, whom I'm really glad that I did meet today, counselor for Atobbico Lakeshore, I draw your attention to the words of George Gershwin's jazz song, I'll build a stairway to paradise with a new step every day. Saravon does a great jazz version. I won't, but several new developments in this area have already been appeased. There's been a uh a revision of the pol the project next to us by the local church and James St. James Cathedral downtown is now doing the same buddy thing and 61 floors. Good luck folks. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Our next speaker uh sorry I should ask are there any no questions. Thank you. Our next speaker is Judy uh Pillar Tahhee. Is Judy online? No. Um our next speaker is Michael Goldberg. >> Welcome Michael. >> Thank you members of council. >> Five minutes. Go ahead. >> Mr. chair. Um I am here to um representing the the applicant Montes. Um we have had a uh quite a wholesome process uh leading to the staff report and the recommendations that are before you. Um I appreciate the uh uh the collaboration um uh with the counselor and with the uh uh with the city staff in in arriving at uh the the positive staff report. We did attend um the uh community meeting uh the community consultation meeting that had a number of the comments that you have just heard. I think in the staff report that's before you um really those comments are addressed in the traffic sections uh in the transportation sections uh and in the built form sections and land use sections here in reference to the um uh in reference to the land use for the subject site. We are in a PMTSA. We are across the street from the subway. We are in a center within the structure of the city of uh Toronto official plan and it's if you look at I believe it's page 18 which is a land use map. We are surrounded on all sides by mixeduse area or utility corridor. Um the closest neighborhoods is south of Blure, not even fronting on Blure but south of Blure. uh and the small amount of shadows that do follow on on the park on any one spot on on the Tom Riley Park to the northeast on any one spot. Um the uh shadow is limited. It's transitional. It doesn't last for any length of time. Probably about an hour on any one spot because it's moving through the landscape um very quickly. So uh I don't have um any other comments to provide to you. We support the recommendations of staff, but I'd be happy to answer any questions that uh anyone may have. Thank you very much. >> Uh thank you. Uh questions from councelor Mley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair through you. Uh thanks for joining us today, Michael. Um I did want to just dig into some of the areas of concern that we heard from our local community um and specifically the loss of the medical um access and the medical um offices that exist within the current building. Now, uh we had initially had some conversations with yourself and the owner about the possibility of retaining some of those some of that use. Uh we were very clear that that was an important thing for our community. We know that that is the case. Can you talk to us about where that landed and the practicalities of um continuing to host uh medical offices within this new proposal? >> Yeah, this is a 12story medical office building. It's a it's a dynamic that's having happening in many parts of Toronto. Uh the city is examining this actively themselves through the office space needs study that uh Nberry Lion has done uh because of the provisions of the uh under appeal OPA 231. But having said that, um, city council has landed that where there is to be office replacement um, sought, it's going to be in the downtown as a requirement or at the young edgington. It's recognizing the constraint and if I can call it this um, burden that office replacement has on the feasibility of housing projects throughout Toronto. So um um this is an so that's from a city's response point of view from a practical point of view. This is one office building um and uh there are a number of office buildings with vacancies with availabilities in this neighborhood. Um uh and uh so if there's to be relocation, it wouldn't surprise me if many of the uh tenants of the buildings do relocate within the immediate area. um um in the northeast quadrant of Islington and Blure. There's certainly plenty of office space and availability in in that space and um um if the market shifts there will be uh possibly the ability to bring some more online but the it isn't there now and it's not there for the foreseeable future. We have the original pro the the one last thing I'm going to say in response to the question is um uh in response to the a request to activate the aberoil frontage and to provide some possibilities for some tenants possibly medical dental possibly uh office uses possibly retail and service commercial uses. There is 90 square meters of um uh retail and service commercial space or nonresidential space on the ground floor facing uh Abberfoil in the southeast corner of the ground floor and and that was a response to some of the community um concerns that were expressed. >> Thank you. Uh we do appreciate working together to secure that space. I think it's going to be an important one for the community, but although it is quite limited in comparison to what they'll be losing. Uh we heard from Norma some facts about Atypico Lake Shore and Atypico center. Uh we do have uh the some of the largest number of seniors per capita in our communities. And just to your point, I thank you for pointing that out around the replacement piece not being uh required here in Atobbico because I do think that that's problematic. Um obviously seniors who are living in their homes don't want to necessarily have to go downtown or otherwise to have the services that they need in their community. So uh it is important that we continue to to keep that in mind. Uh I will just quickly ask you though um my last quick question with respect to the issue of the tenure on the site. Uh we heard from an about the reality of the condo market currently and the slow starts and frankly the lack of sales. Um can you talk to us about the timelines you anticipate on this project and why uh you're continuing to pursue it at this time despite the market conditions? Um you've probably witnessed yourselves members of a committee that uh that um developers are pivoting. Um they are nimble in their pivoting to try to capture um um market capital funding uh financing um and a market that can be served as quickly as possible. We I'm not here to announce that this has become a rental housing project, but it's quite possible that it may become a rental housing project. No decision on that has yet been made. Uh and uh um I've been working on many and there's many in the in across the city and I'm sure here in Atobbico that maybe were first thought to be condominium tenur and have shifted to become rental tenure. uh which is a an amenity to the community um and allows some uh velocity to continue. >> Yeah. Thank you. I just have one last question. I just remembered it. Thank you. I'm going to slide it in if I can, Mr. Chair. Um with respect to the current um non-RES versus residential with the proposal before us, if there are better conditions for commercial spaces in the future, does this zoning bylaw leave uh the opportunity open? >> I believe it does. >> Okay. and I'll put that to staff as well. Thank you. That's all. >> Thank you. Uh I will ask if there are any other speakers uh to this item. Sorry, I'm I'm so sorry I'm jumping ahead. Councilman Ziata, question the speakers. >> Just a question on the That was my question on the medical office space. So, um they do they have existing leases now? The the ones that are in there? >> They do. and and their leases expire when >> I I think they v they expire at various times counselor there there's no uniform period but I I think there's some uh ability for the landlord to terminate the leases as required. >> Okay. And so have some of them that have left have they found other spaces? >> I believe they have. Yes, >> they have. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. >> I will ask if there are any other speakers to this item. >> Seeing none, uh questions of staff. >> Councelor Mley. >> Thanks, Mr. Chair. Through you to staff. Um we have talked about it a bunch during the public consultation process as well. We heard a considerable amount from the local community about people concerned uh about losing the medical offices that are currently um on the site. Uh did community planning want to secure replacement for non-residential space within the proposed redevelopment? And if so, why didn't we? >> Through you, Mr. Chair, at this current moment, policy 3.5.1 regarding office replacement is not in force. This is currently under appeal. In addition to that, council voted in favor to scope those policies to the downtown and the Young and Eglinton secondary plan area should they come into effect. In addition to this, the site falls within the mixeduse areas a secondary plan land use designation and the mixeduse areas a land use designation. While they permit commercial standalone buildings and mixeduse buildings, they don't prescribe a set limit of non-residential gross floor area. Um, so on that basis, we just had to do our best in terms of securing what we could. Staff do sympathize with the concerns of the nearby residents with respect to the potential loss of those medical spaces. But given this policy constraint, if I can call it that, the best staff could do was essentially revise the zoning bylaw amendment from residential apartment to commercial residential to allow these mixed uses in the future and also incorporate the minimum provision of approximately 1,000 square ft of non-res space at grade. So the proposed zoning before us does in fact include flexibility should future state, future market, future conditions support um the replacement of non-res. >> It does. It's a minimum non-res requirement. >> And to be clear, even through this process, city staff can secure some levels of non-residential, we have no mechanism to determine or dictate what exact use comes back into that space. Is that a fair assessment? >> We do not. There are a series of uses permitted within the CR zone. >> Great. So, ultimately, it's the land owner and the building folks who would who would determine what future leases or future tenants, whether they'd be non-res or otherwise. Correct. >> Through the chair, that's correct. >> Okay, that's helpful. And I think important to note that we can't secure this. We can't guarantee this one way or the other. though we do want to keep flexibility um for the possibility of it as we know it's such a critically important use in the community. Um my last quick question was just with respect to shadow impacts. We know this is a very tall building. Uh it is immediately above a TTC station um and so well situated for a transit oriented and a priority major transit station area. Um what did community planning find with respect to the shadow impacts um impacting Tom Riley Park to the north? So, with respect to shadow, no shadows fall onto Tom Riley Park during the summer solstice. When it comes to the spring and fall equinoxes, there are levels of shadow onto the program areas of the park, but they're only limited to 2 hours, that being 3 to 4 p.m. on the program playground and 5 to 6:00 p.m. on the soccer field. And I just want to note that the secondary plan policy does not prohibit new shadow. It says minimize the impact of shadow onto parks, which staff are of the opinion this proposal does. Um, my last quick question here is, you know, while this is an incredibly tall building and I remember my jaw on the ground when I first saw this proposal and the number of stories, it's the tallest one we've navigated as an office in this term. Um, why is this how does this fit into the vision for this corridor uh according to our official plan and our growth um policies? So it's staff's through the chair. It's staff's opinion that the proposed height and density are appropriate given the site's location within the heart of the Atobbico Center centers are strategic growth areas outside of the downtown core. Additionally, the secondary plan calls for the tallest heights and greatest densities around subway stations. In this case, Kenan subway station is being reconstructed right across the street. And also there have been the presence of similarly approved buildings uh specifically at the housing now site which has been approved up to heights of 178 meters. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Are there any other questions of staff on this item? Seeing none members wishing to speak. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. Uh and thank you to the deputants uh who took the time to join us today and to the local community who participated in this process including in the community consultation meeting that was hosted. Uh we know this is a very tall building and I mentioned that a moment ago in my questions to staff. Um it is it was shocking to me to see 61 stories uh at Islington Station when this application first came in. Um but as we heard and as we understand this is a growth center. uh this is where higher order transit is situated and this is the vision for how our city grows in a sustainable way where we're placing density where it can be supported by infrastructure that already exists. Um and so while we did explore quite a number of additional opportunities here including really working hard to try to help the applicant and owner understand the critical connection that the medical offices and medical buildings provide. Um there are practic on a practical standpoint there are some challenges and limits to what we can secure in that regard. Uh and again so we've worked closely with staff to have a flexible policy that allows for that in the future if and as the market conditions can allow. Um and I will be taking away a false some follow of work about the um current under appeal um with respect to the commercial pieces that apply currently to downtown. And I think we need to look more closely at that and how it could and should apply here to attopico especially in growth centers. We need complete communities here. That's critical. Um I also wanted to just note we did explore quite significantly with the TTC and encourage the applicant to go down a path to see if there was a direct connection to the station that was possible below grade. We know the current pedestrian environment is quite busy. There's lots of construction. It is a largely seniors community. Uh a lot of empty nesters in those condos along Abberfoil and we want to make sure that their safety as pedestrians continues to be paramount uh through not only through this transition but in the future state as this community grows. Uh we also know frankly that the city has identified Islington Station for additional high-rise opportunities for housing including affordable housing once the station redevelopment is completed. So there is a longstanding vision for intensification on this site. this application is aligned with that vision. Um again unfortunately some of the areas that we had tried to get some additional pieces including including tech connectivity directly to TTC below grade were just not feasible from a practical standpoint. Um but we will continue to work closely on the community benefits aspect of this and any sight specific planning that we can uh work towards a positive uh impact at grade for the current and future residents here. Um I will leave it there Mr. chair uh with thanks and we'll be moving the staff recommendations. >> Uh thank you councelor. Anyone else wishing to speak? I'm just going to make a quick comment on it. Um I know this is difficult. We we face difficult applications. The previous one was difficult as well and I don't want anyone to think that if the committee is not active or or or uh saying a lot. It's it's because we have some experience in reading these in all of the various layers and frameworks that compose of the law around it. And uh you know this is by a subway station. It's within a a planning overlay. It's within another planning overlay uh that that has to do with the Atobbico Center. And I know the medical building. I I've been there several times. I've got family members who've been there several times. I know the spot. I used to travel through Islington station a lot like every day for a long period of time. So like I know the spot well. It is very busy at Abberfoil. It's even busier because of the construction. It's it's difficult uh for me even to drop off my wife if she has to go into a dental appointment there. Uh so none of that is lost on me, believe me. Um but the first question, you know, often as a counselor we think of, you know, uh can this building change to something else? You know, what does the law say about that? what do our rules say about that? I think what the report is telling us is the answer is yes and that doesn't make it easy. Uh these are happening all over the place and I have the very same questions that residents raise that you know if we're if we're going to have a complete community and have all this density like where do you go to have a medical appointment or to have a blood sample drawn or to a dentist? Like what's left? And those are disappearing. They're being converted into housing constantly. I'll ask a simple one and and we all know like there's a small grocery store in the front there, but like what else do we have in the area? Yeah, you got no frills down Islington. It's still a fair trip. So, it's really important that the city look to policies to try to build in all of those I call them the basket of amenities that a successful community needs. And this is definitely a loss this particular building and the function that occurs in that. But we have to think about what the rules say about and what the laws say about it. And sometimes I say the decisions are bigger than what's just being made in front of us today. And I I know councelor Morley knows how difficult this is. So the second question then is is like the shock like 60 61 stories like the biggest anywhere around. And so how how do we make a decision on that? And I listened carefully to the answer about the shadow. You know, I did some calculations because there's websites you can do it, but in order to not shadow the park, the building would have to be about half the height. And I think I think the rules call for more. I mean, there's a 55story building across the street. Um, so how do we measure that out? And that I look to the planning professionals. I don't like any shadow on Tom Riley Park, but I realize there are frameworks and decision processes that allow for these sorts of things. And so how far is too far? I don't know. I look to their advice on it. But yeah, I I you know, I'm not overjoyed about the size and the change. Uh but I also have to read all of the parts here and think about what people talk to us about it. So that that is just my message to the community is please don't feel discouraged that you know please don't think we haven't paid attention or thought this through. We have, but they are very difficult decisions that we are in a position to make and your counselor has been hyperfocused on this. I can tell and and I'm glad that she has. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none on the item, all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh members, I did have a new order, a new item of business to introduce. It didn't make the first round. Uh, so I would like to move that that to add it as new business. It is a a review of the infrastructure on Mil Road. Thank you to the clerk for assisting me in getting that uh finalized and in a format to put online. Uh so all those in favor to add the new business, any opposed, that is carried. It should be posted momentarily and you'll find it self-explanatory. Our next item is EY 32.5 which is 3100 Weston Road, a zoning bylaw amendment application. It's an appeal report. We have speakers. Our first speaker is Roxanna Rack. Roxan is online. Uh good morning Roxanna. It's Stephen Holiday from the Atoba New York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Hi. Good morning. Yes, I'll be able to hear you. I unmuted myself. >> Perfect. I can hear you well. You've got five minutes. Please go ahead. >> Okay, sounds good. Thank you. Um, I just want to let everybody know that I was in a cat traffic car accident in 2010. I was rejected from the rear window on the highway. I wasn't breathing. I had glass in my eye. I was in a coma for two months. I was paralyzed when speaking or walking for five months. I had uh three surgeries on my a head stop, two on my uh leg, my fractured femur on my right leg. Correct. And then from I was in the hospital November 21st to April 11th. On April 11, while my parents took me out of the hospital in a wheelchair, I uh went on the wheelchair to the Western 3100 Western Road to the Marine Shrine of Gratitude. And as my father was um took legal wheelchair to the mother Mary statue in the middle of the shrine, he said, "Please uh try to stand up." I'm like, "I can't I won't be able to walk my whole life. I can't move at all." He's like, "Please stand. I will give you assistance." And I took my first uh step from sitting on the land of the holy on 3100 Western Road. And then I took uh my first steps in the procession like a month after holding um in a wheelchair. And then a time by time went by and then slowly I started walking and developing into a regular person with uh minimum uh mental and health physical disabilities. Uh at the moment I won't be I wasn't able to attend the meeting in the Toronto meeting because I'm up north in Mskoka uh owning my own business cafe on uh on the Braven her ward and I'm on this uh situation at the moment because I went through a lot of rehabitation and because of the western uh holy land I went there weekly and each week I had a lot more power uh more physical and psychological. Every time I need some uh psychological problems, I went there to take a land of peace in the world because um everywhere is a lot of drama going on. And uh that's where I went to have a calm um calm area for me. And then um I want to let you know that a lot of people were here healed there from cancer and other situations uh health situations as well. >> I I wish I would be able to show you physically how I looked like before because my visual uh performance now is not an aspect of how I was uh disabled. Uh there are some uh witnesses in the in the courtroom at the moment that can attest that I was disabled. I was able to walk or speak for many months uh through this year and as well in the cafe I have a couple of icons and one one icon is me in a wheelchair with father bad in the background and some other visitor in the background near the statue of Mary and a lot of customers came see me and be like um who's the image of this image of me they're like how are you um running my own business totally of great rating and when you were in a wheelchair years ago, right? I said because of this land uh 3100 Western Road, I became healed from Mother Mary and from all the spirits that came to heal me both physically and psychologically. So they advised me, my customers everywhere around Ontario and even for America, they said I want to go visit this holy place in Toronto one day. I'm like sadly I won't be you are not able to attend this place now because it's restricted by the government. However, hopefully it will be able to be open to the public in the near future. If you have any questions, please be able to ask because I'll be able to answer them. >> Thank you very much. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us today. Our next speaker is Serge Robach. Is Serge here or online? >> Okay. Could you ask Serge to come in? Morning, Serge. Welcome to community council. You've got five minutes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you for giving me opportunity to speak and >> Sorry, sir. Ju just bend the microphone so I can hear you. It's okay. Perfect. >> Yeah. Uh thank you for opportunity to speak and uh I want to share my concerns about developers developing the like that development at 31 Western Road. I'm the owner of the basement waterproofing and foundation repair company for about 20 years and I'm the one who is dealing with the problems that people having the customers my customers when houses built on swamps on hills that are okay at this point but what's going to happen in 20 years and it's not fair for the for those people they are spending thousands and thousands later on and is it really a really strong reason that something needs to be developed there? It just is there any other places other than hills or close to hill that can be like some houses added built? I believe there are some. It's not really that has to be that if it's not built there that many many people won't have a roof on their heads and that's a but but basically it's not the the point that I wanted. I want to speak about other stuff. About 20 years I was attending those those grounds with my kids and those parks, community center, shrine, everything. And uh and I know the the amount of traffic that we are having over there and I very upset when at some of our previous meetings some city authorities were saying that oh it's going to add only a fracture to the traffic that we are having. We're just going to adjust the street lights a little bit. But but why haven't you adjusted by now? Why you haven't changed something? improve and then think about adding more cars am do deal with the traffic first and have you ever get on that western road when there were accident there is no really good way around you stuck for hours you you just no really good detour over there it just you know adding more cars make it more congestion it's not a very good idea then about that uh proposed devel development. Think about like uh at least what I thought what I heard 125 units uh 90 parking spots. How many houses, how many families has no cars? How many families has just one car over there? You are kind of like how they going to get and do the shopping? how they going to get to the like with all those traffics and and and buses and uh at the time of the you know like rush hours I I I I think something is wrong over there you know something is wrong and uh getting in and out like in those 20 years getting in and out those properties uh those like fields uh like in and out it's not easy task it's not easy task even right now but adding some more structures there. And think about this, it's not only like sophisticated drivers going to be there every day. It's simple women's driving, you know, young drivers. And over there to add even more strength, it's going to be problems. It's going to be problems. And another point, another point, this property was donated by very rich and famous family and it already holds very good historical and heritage value. Not just four walls of that building. Everything it was donate at the whole thing. And think about like like a car. You have a old car, very rich car, like not rich, kind of like rare, expensive car. and you take the wheels out of it. You tell the take the engine, yeah, there's going to be a body, but it's not going to be the same. If you It means if you develop part of that property, it's gone. And uh think about like if somebody says it's not really much value on it. Uh historical, think about like good wine, it's already has value, but for the next generations, for our kids, grandchildren, it's going to be more and more. How many properties like that you can find in the area? None. Please protect it. And and from religious side many years we were attending there. And I'm going to share you with a small story. Not a small story that happened like 2,000 years ago. There was a city Jerusalem and there was a man and perfect man and God that was crucified over there. And some authority called Ponty Pilot. He washed his hand. I wanted you not you not to wash your hands to step in, protect, preserve and help. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Are there any questions of the speaker? >> Councelor Nunziata, please go. >> So, you do realize what we have before us is that the applicant has appealed it to the OOLT and what this uh staff is asking for us to send city staff to go and and and defend us. >> I'm not really sorry. I'm not really get >> Well, the applicant appealed this application. >> I understand. >> So, what we have before us is that the city staff are asking us to approve the recommendation to attend the land tribunal in opposition of this application. So, that's what's before us. >> Okay. you know, I just want to know. I understand what we have. Yeah. >> Okay. I just, you know, >> Yeah. We're not here to approve that. We're here to send city staff to oppose it. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh, our next speaker is Angela Carboni. >> Good day. >> Thank you for your time. >> Welcome. You've got five minutes. Um, I'm here representing 23,000 people and Roxanna called from Mskoka and she was near death and now she walks. I saw people who die were dying and now they have children and Averance has been kind enough to let us pray. But people miss this place. We're talking about thousands of people. If only 23,000 showed their names. There's thousands more. And this is a unique piece of land that is a bit of heaven in the city. God chose this land. I didn't. And we're all here begging for your intervention for the next generation. We're in a country where death and hopelessness is huge. Money can't buy that. And I saw so many, my mother included, who had cancer and lived to 98 because of that place. 85 with colon cancer, would have had a bag, probably would have died, lived to 98, and I can't turn my back on it. So, we don't want to hurt anybody. We don't hate housing, but we want to preserve Lords. This is Lords. God gave us Lords and Fatima. And how many people can say that in Canada? So, we're entrusting you to stand for what's right. God bless you and thank you for your time. >> Thank you. No questions for the speaker. Our next speaker is uh Eva Pnik. Is Eva here or online? Thank you. >> Welcome Eva. You have five minutes. >> Thank you. >> Eva, >> actually Eva is correct. It's Canada. >> Eva. >> No, Eva. Eva is fine. A rose by any other name. >> Okay. Good morning. My name is Eva. uh Eva Pushnik and I am a longtime resident living in living in the immediate vicinity of 3100 Western Road. I want to speak briefly about something I feel that has been missing in the conversation around this site. This property did not exist in isolation from the surrounding neighborhood. For generations, the relationship between the homes, the hillside, the playing fields, the river corridor, and surrounding open space formed part of everyday community life. Humberme remained relatively stable through 80 years, decades of neighborhood life, and many residents experienced this landscape as something connected, familiar, and shared. For many residents, this was never simply a future development site or a planning file. It was part of how people lived. Children playing, seniors walking, neighbors gathering, people enjoying quiet open space and seasonal traditions. What many of us experienced over the last almost three years now was rapid change, fencing, noise, altered movement, movement through the site, lighting, changing activity levels, and uncertainty about what was changing and why. Many residents struggled to understand how decisions affecting everyday use and neighborhood character were being communicated and considered. >> I wrote another part. >> Thank you. >> No. Okay. Given our experience since the summer, Given our experience since the summer of 23, our neighborhood now knows what Jeth Jethro Kirby Crang not only built a community integrated into the watershed and parklands. He also built an outdoor auditorium for all and any noise coming from the gardener's cottage and top of sight gets amplified, travels down the basin and the fields and echoes and reverberates over and through our community. My request today is simple. Before further discussions move forward, I ask that the lived experience of nearby residents be meaningfully considered alongside planning, heritage, and development discussions. Some things matter because they are written in reports. Others matter because generations quietly lift them. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us today. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Yvani Mirabel. >> Good afternoon everybody. Peace >> Hello. >> Peace be with you. >> Five minutes. >> Um just to it was beautiful to enter today uh this morning. My time is on. Perfect. um and see that it's a day of inclusion. Well, I bring my Lord Jesus Christ with me and may he bless you all today and always and all your families is a day of inclusion. What it means is I'm included and my Lord Jesus Christ as well in this chamber. Um he never changed. He never changed. Mother Mary never changed. We had talked and I spoke about this site for a long time. We've been assisting meetings city hall right here. We have heard the constituents, the people that live in the neighborhood, the people that had enjoy the graces, the blessings that this beautiful place chose by God and mother Mary to be there has give to the community and how they appreciate it, how they love it, how they assist, they how they contribute, how much good and well-being had distributed to all the people that live in the neighborhood. without no names. I seen Muslims playing on the fields inviting us Catholics to adjoin it. I had seen all kind of religions, all kind of cultures, everybody being together in an area that is also city is community but is also faithful and it's something to be considered. We are talking about indigenous traits, lands, people that had lived through all the ages in these areas to conserve. Not only because is Catholics and Christians is because it's neighbors that have been living there for 60, 40, 50 years, two generations. What are we doing all together is trying to make this city better? sometimes make a better means to conserve the special parts of the city that if we go into it we will destroy it. progress, future land building, planning, everybody involved. Everybody here is getting a way of living. Everybody's being provided. Everybody's participating. And I hope that and I pray and I beg that you know we all get together for one solution to leave everybody together on the for those that want to leave without it. It's okay by us. We will pray for them. But on the one god and on the one something beautiful thing is to collaborate and live with each other. Not to destroy one means something to others. You know because if we going to include all of us in the same house it means to live together to share together to love together. God is love. Nothing else than love. Then destroying something doesn't mean love to me. Let's going to build build around it. Let's going to build together. Let's going to live together and love each other. Actually, that's what my God says to me. You know, if it's not love, it's not. And that's what I come in here to advocate for the median shrine of gratitude for good. You know, whoever has eyes can see the miracles. Whoever had ears can hear all the beautiful things happening around it. You know if we want to believe we got the examples, we got all the things that have been exposed in city hall in the meetings in all the gatherings. We wonder what are we gathering to defend something? How is 23,000 people putting the signature? 23,000. That's that's a number. That's a big number. How many people went to the community center to raise their opinions? We welcome everybody. We love everybody, but we also stand for what is right. We stand for love. We stand for building a future together. But my perspective of building a future together is not destroying somebody's interests, somebody's traditions, somebody's culture, somebody's faith is to build together, not to take over. God bless you all. >> Thank you. >> Are there any other speakers here online to this item? Seeing none questions of staff. Uh, councelor Mley. >> Thank you. Um, and thanks to the deputants. I did have the pleasure to to attend this site uh and to experience it. I'm just wondering if there are any current his historic or other designations on this particular site for the building or for the shrine in the rear. preservation any any special designations for the property >> through the chair. Um yes, the the property has been designated heritage and there are attributes that have been protected. Um the the shrine is was not um is not one of them, but the house and um I the house, the garage, and the pump house um are are protected. >> Okay, thank you. That's just my quick question. Thanks so much. >> So, um, >> go ahead. >> The ones that are designated heritage under the Heritage Act, what can be on the site >> through the chair? As as long as the heritage attributes are not are not touched, um, the the applicant can propose uh on other areas of the site. Okay. As long as it's not touched the the heritage. Okay. Thanks. >> Any other questions of staff? Seeing >> Yeah. Councelor Prussa, go right ahead. >> Yep. >> It's to uh transportation staff. There's a communication on the agenda today from the Emery Village BIA. Are you aware of that? through the chair. Uh yes, I have heard about the communication. >> Okay. Uh so so the communication basically says that the Emery Village BIA is doing uh its own uh uh transportation study uh and uh will be forwarding and is advising you that they will be forwarding that to you. uh what do you normally do in that situation >> through the chair? Um if it's part of uh the normal course of development review, we would take a that study into account as we would uh whenever any area resident or business association or resident association submits comments uh on the proposal. >> Okay. So, so you so, so you you're giving everyone your assurance that you're going to take take a look at that study and look at the conclusions of those studies uh of that study and that study would then uh in part form your opinions about um traffic uh um traffic flow through this area >> through the chair. That is correct. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you. >> Are there any further questions to staff? Seeing none, members wishing to speak. >> Council, >> would you like me to go first? >> Yes, >> sure. >> Uh, sure. I have a I have a motion or a number of motions um uh which the the clerk will u put up on the uh on the board and I I'll speak to them briefly because I I I don't normally uh go through my motions to because they're kind of like self-explanatory but but in this case I I think they're really germanine to uh the the uh proposal that's in front of us. So f first of all what I want to say to people is this. Here's what we are doing here today. We are not saying yay or nay to the development. That's not that's not before us today. This development has been appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal. What we are doing here today is basically directing um what's what's been recommended in the report and what I'm happy to move is that we are directing our city solicitors and planners and and all of the other folks u that um that are required to go to the Ontario Land Tribunal in opposition to the development that has been proposed on this site with um some uh additional directions. So that's what we are doing here today. Okay. So the the the first motion I have up there is a motion that says that at the south end of the this particular site is a walkway from Weston Road uh uh and it's the only access from Western Road into that connects to the Ravine Trail System, the Humber River system on the south end of the property and just North of the of the uh ravine trail on the south end of the property is some municipal infrastructure. Both of those elements I believe are are um are protected by easements both to the benefit of the city and of the TRCA and to the TRCA. When you look at the development that's been proposed, some of those town houses look like they have been put onto the lands that currently um have those easements running uh through them. That is highly highly inappropriate and and I believe our staff need to take a good close look at that because the walkway that runs from Western Road to the ravine should be protected and maintained because it's heavily used by the community to access the ravine system. That should stay and whatever municipal infrastructure is there should stay. There are also some very serious cautions in the report uh with respect to our ravine bylaw that speaks to that particular area of the site which are our ravine uh folks have indicated uh needs to be u uh reviewed and looked at. There are some questions still that remain with respect to what's considered top of bank, the top of bank line that runs through the property. Um, as well that that needs to be determined in in conversations with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. Uh, they they are working with the applicants to determine uh where those lines fall. uh and they continue to be very very important for this application because if anybody knows the site there's you know there's a house the heritage home or the the old rivermeat cottage which is on the top of the lands and then the lands basically drop off in a very very steep hill a very fragile hill uh and and basically uh you know to a level uh that's more consistent with the pond and the river uh at the bottom of the at the bottom of that hill and uh and that is a very very important line uh um uh going forward u because there's also another comment in the report which is very very clear uh which basically says um I believe page seven somewhere that all lands with within the natural hazard and associated buffers should be resoneed to open space natural areas Yes. Um, and I believe that that's uh uh that's a noble pursuit because it's something that that that should be done. I I just want to explain briefly my if I can ask or or if uh if you'd like I I you know we can take a second round. >> You need a second round to speak. >> Well, you know, I I I I need to explain the the the other two motions that are really really important. So the second motion that you see me make up there is the the motion with respect to the um the Emery Village BIA study that is forthcoming because the current uh traffic study that has that has been done by the applicant and applied to this application is somewhat silent on accident history in this particular area of Western Road. um as as local residents have indicated and local residents have suggested, Western Road in this area is uh is has a high volume of traffic. One of the deputants spoke to that. Uh it also has u a number of accidents that have occurred in this area over the years because of the way the Western Road the Great is uh situated. Uh what happens is there's a falloff from Shephard. there's a curve, there's some sighteline issues and so on. And precisely on that bend and in that um in that um elevation uh uh where that elevation differential occurs on Western Road, the applicants have proposed to open a second driveway uh to their to their development. a second driveway which I might add is runs foul to the city of transport to the city's transportation policies because we seek to close driveways on major arterial roads to allow traffic to flow uh easier and uh and better and to uh create less conflict on roads. uh and and this application flies in the face of that policy and it seeks to open a second driveway. Even our staff is saying uh that whatever driveway or whatever access goes into this site should be consolidated into a one driveway. So, so uh so that transportation that second transportation study I think is really really important and really really germanine uh to this application because safety here is a paramount issue. It's a really really important issue in terms of uh uh the history and in terms of the way uh western road should operate here and uh and I believe that that uh needs uh needs it needs to be looked at uh with a um uh you know with an appropriate lens. And la lastly let me get to the to the part that that I think a lot of the folks spoke to here. This site uh has been home uh to the uh Marian shrine of gratitude uh for many many years and many many people have come to um to pray uh to congregate uh and to love each other there. Uh it is uh uh it is u you know a site that's so important to the local community but more importantly as well the Marian shrine of gratitude is located on the hill well below top of bank those lands um I understand now they are in private ownership but those lands have been maintained developed sustained enhanced by public dollars for seven decades. Let me explain how it operated as a public school. Those are public dollars that develop the fields, that put in the lighting, that maintain the hill, that maintain the site, all of those things. And in fact, continue to do that as a community center. We put in lighting. City of Toronto invested a whack of monies down in the in in in that area to to put in lighting going forward. No condominium corporation, future condominium corporation. You know, there's a plan to bring a lot of people onto this site. No future condominium corporation will be able to maintain those lands, rehabilitate those lands, renaturalize those lands. It will cost millions and millions of dollars or maintain them in their current state because it'll be cost prohibitive for any condo corp or any land owner in the future to do that. And to think that somehow they are going to stay in private ownership when you bring in all of the new people that are expected to be brought in on this site who will meander out onto those areas uh is is in my view foolhardy. And I believe they should be they should come into public ownership because only the public and and through public ownership can those lands be renaturalized, be maintained, be protected, preserved, and used by the same communities that have been using them for seven decades. And I hope that the property owners will come to understand that, understand what that means in its entirety. And instead of you know being being adversarial with a very large community that lives and wants to worship there that they bring them on board as a as you know co-artners in a and create a community feeling in a community sense where everybody can can you know live in harmony. >> Thank you councelor Peruta. Any other members wishing to speak? So, there's a a technical change to the title. Okay. Any other members wishing to speak? Seeing none on councelor PR's amendment. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. On the item as amended, all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Thank you. Uh members, >> do you want a recorded vote on the amendment or the item as amended? >> Okay. Recorded votes. Madame clerk. >> On councelor Per's amendment to the item. All those in favor, councelor Perusa, councelor Naniata, councelor Holidayiday, councelor Mley, councelor Croanti, that item carries unanimously on the item as amended. All those in favor, councelor Perusa, councelor Nunziata, councelor Holidayiday, councelor Mley, councelor Croanti, that item carries unanimously. >> Thank you members. I'm going to do a quick time check. We have um we have a few items left. Uh and there are a few speakers. I'm not going to estimate the time that we have required left, but we have a choice of breaking for lunch or we have the choice of pursuing ahead and maybe I'd take a a motion or a suggestion from members on what we do next. Just to confirm, we've got >> Mr. Chair, can I >> councelor Croanti? >> Yeah. No, I just got to make a a quick recommendation. 32.6 six is up next, I believe, if and uh >> I'm not sure if if the speaker is present, Kumza, but that should be pretty quick >> uh before lunch. Good. >> Yes, we've got six, seven, 8, 9, and 10 with speakers. We've got a couple of items of new business. Um most have one speaker on them, so I I'll just check from the the group. >> I do have a motion, Mr. Chair, suggestion that we um move to extend to complete the agenda. Councelor Moley moves to extend to complete the agenda. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Okay. Uh off to their next item. Ey 32.6 uh 555 Rexdale Boulevard Woodbine Secondary Plan Study infrastructure Master Plan and Transportation Master Plan interim report. We have one registered speaker that is uh Kumsa Baker. Is Kumsa here or online? Kumsa is online. Welcome Kumza. Good afternoon. It's Steven Holiday from the topical York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Hi. Good afternoon. Can you hear me? >> Very well. Uh, welcome. You've got five minutes. Please go ahead. >> Fantastic. Uh, good afternoon members of the Toboco York Community Council. Uh, my name is Kuma. I'm with the organization called the Toronto Community Benefits Network. Uh, I'm here to speak on item uh, EY 32.6. six, the Woodbine secondary plan study. Uh the TCBN welcomes today's update regarding the Woodbine secondary plan and have brief remarks to share. Uh we've also submitted a letter. Uh the TCBN has been a participant in the consultations that have been hosted by the city of Toronto. Um we feel that given the significant plan for growth and development as part of the secondary plan, uh we do have a couple recommendations. Uh the first recommendation is that uh we would like to see a more comprehensive community engagement and consultation as part of the secondary plan. Uh we did attend an openhouse where there wasn't uh a lot of community particip participation. Uh we think that um there's a great opportunity to be more proactive in the engagement approach uh to ensure that diverse residents uh including nonprofit organizations, community groups are uh active and aware about what's happening with this redevelopment uh of the Woodbine uh area. Our second recommendation is uh we want to see the inclusion uh inclusion of a community development plan as part of the secondary plan. Uh we do note that as part of secondary plans in other areas such as Downsu uh Jaden Finch uh Mount Mount Dennis uh the city have included a more comprehensive uh community development plan as part of the secondary plan and we think that uh for the Woodbine secondary plan that it would be great to have something similar in place. >> Um the TCB band has been doing a lot of work in Rexdale over the past decade. Uh we were involved in advocating for a community benefits agreement as part of the expansion of the Woodbine Casino uh development which ensured local benefits, jobs and investment in a new child care center. Um to summarize, we are concerned that as the secondary plan is expedited and moves forward that you know many residents in the community will be left behind and we think that a more comprehensive engagement approach along with a community development plan will ensure that there is meaningful community participation in the process. Uh I thank you for your time and uh I welcome any questions that you may have. >> Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? U hey uh we'll go with councelor Croissanti and then councelor >> Nunziata. Thank you Mr. Chair and um and Kumza. Thank you so much for coming out. Uh good to see you and I just want to thank you for uh all the advocacy you do for community benefits and great work that you did back at the uh days of Woodbine. um got a couple of very good recommendations here. And you did you attend the last community consultation meeting that we had for for this site. >> Yeah, we I we attended both the open house as well as the uh the online virtual meeting that also happened. >> Okay. So, in what form do would you like to see um more comprehensive community consultation take place? Um because that's that's something that I absolutely agree with and I'm working with staff and uh to ensure that that happens. >> Yeah, I think like uh going out to community is always a great way of engaging with different stakeholders. There are a lot of really great nonprofits and organizations in the community that do a lot of great work with residents. And so I I think as there's the you know the community services and facility study that's happening ensuring that those consultate those consultants are reaching out to uh those organizations um you know um posting consultations may maybe in different languages as well. We know it's a very diverse community with different languages and just kind of trying to make the process more accessible as possible for people to participate uh I think would would go a long way and I think nonprofits and organizations are on the ground and and have a good connection with community who could help facilitate those activities. >> Okay, great. you know, good suggestions and maybe we could work closely with you for the future consultation programs that we're or uh uh events that we're going to have to ensure that uh we capture all the different various groups and organizations that we need to capture moving forward. So that's great. And when you made mention of the inclusion of u uh uh complete I believe you said development plan, could you elaborate on that? >> Yeah. Um a community development plan is something that's been included in as part of secondary plans in other neighborhoods like Downsu, Jane and Finch, Mount Dennis. Uh but essentially what it does, it ensures that uh um not only thinking about the physical infrastructure but also the the social and economic development of the community, right? So uh I think it it's a more way it's a it's a tool that could ensure that development is more equitable and could support local economic development. So, uh, many of the community development plans have a lot of different priority areas, whether it's related to like social infrastructure in the communities, things like economic development, making sure that communities have access to jobs and opportunities, um, you know, other types of programming as well that can support nonprofits and organizations, things like access to community spaces. So it it's a way of ensuring that as a as a physical area grows that there's also u the community is also kind of um being looked at and and that there's a plan around you know what does that community development aspect look like as part of the redevelopment as well. And so there are a lot of I think really great examples that we could look to uh to maybe potentially replicate as part of this uh secondary plan process. >> Okay, great. Thank you so much. Appreciate that. Those are my questions. Uh here >> thank you uh councelor Nanata. Go ahead. Actually, that was my question. >> Okay. Any other questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Are there any other speakers to this item? >> Seeing none, questions of staff. >> I have a just a couple. Uh, >> go ahead. >> Uh, yes. So if I can just ask staff to uh uh just comment on what they heard from uh from the deputy kuma uh came out and again appreciate all his comments and uh the his organization's been very very active up in the woodbine lands and they will continue to be active in this particular site that's in front of us today. Um so in terms of the uh uh could you comment on both those issues the uh community consultations moving forward and the inclusion of a uh community development plan as well. >> Hang on. Hang on one sec. We got uh >> microphone. >> Yeah. One sec. Councelor Cryanti, we're just having trouble with the mics. >> I I paused your time. >> I'll try that again. Much better. Much better. So, through the chair, in terms of community consultation, we are as part of the overall secondary plan process, we will be continuing to engage with the community. We do actually have our next community engagement um being planned for July the 8th. So, that's a bit of a spoiler. We haven't sent out those notices yet, but um come those will be coming soon. And we do appreciate your comments and I do remember having a conversation with you about uh you know the interest in developing the you know the opportunities for community facilities and services as part of the overall secondary plan process. That is something that staff are looking at as the first step in this process. staff are uh partnering or have reached out to the various community partners to determine what the needs are on this site and then we will be developing a community services development or community services delivery strategy and so that is work that is ongoing at the moment as part of that overall work engagement will also happen with nonprofits that is part of the regular process and so these are the various aspects of the um in terms of what the opportunities are on the site are opported. >> Okay, great. Thank you. So, and you I I believe you indicated that you have been working very closely with Kumza as well and and the nonprofit organizations. >> Sorry, that is correct. We will be reaching out to the various nonprofit organizations to make sure that they are involved in this process. >> Okay. Um All right. Thank you very much. Those are my questions. Mr. Chair, >> thank you councelor. Any other questions? Seeing none members to speak. >> Uh Mr. Well, whenever I'm happy to speak, >> go ahead councelor Casanti. >> So uh Mr. Mr. Chair. Uh so what we have in front of us is is uh simply to endorse uh uh and direction for advancement on the Woodbine secondary plant study. Uh very exciting uh things are happening up in total north on the Woodbine lands. Of course you've seen a lot of great things happen already with the existing uh uh northerly part of the site uh with the casino and hotels and uh so it's very much becoming a destination place. Uh but now uh what's even more exciting is we're creating uh you know thousands of units of of housing uh and creating a it's a a community in m uh in the making currently right now and uh to to ensure that we have a complete community by the time we're all done some years down the road. So this is right now just asking staff uh giving them cure direction to move forward and come back in the second quarter of next year uh with uh more uh more detail. Of course there are a lot of questions at the moment. We've uh my office has spent many many hours and days uh working with closely with staff. I want to thank staff for the great work they're doing. They're working uh diligently to make sure that uh we put together uh one of the finest complete communities that this city's ever seen. So on that note, Mr. Chair, I uh moving staff recommendations. >> Thank you, councelor. Anyone else to speak on this item? Um would you like to move it? Councelor Croanti. >> He did. >> Yes, >> you did. Councelor Croanti moves. All those in favor? Any opposed? That is carried. >> Thank you. >> Uh thank you. Our next item is EY 32.751 Bernham Thorp present application to remove two private trees. Uh we do have a registered speaker that is Nicole Curado. Nicole's online. Uh welcome to community council Nicole. Uh can you hear me? Okay. Uh Nicole Curado, uh Steven Holidayiday, chair of Atobbico York Community Council. Can you hear? Okay, we cannot hear you. >> Hello. So the the item the item is uh yes the item application to cut a private tree or a city tree >> application to remove two private trees at 51 and Bernham Thorp Crescent. Oh, these two trees are >> these two trees are absolutely beautiful. And the the reason for removing them, I believe, is to is to build and to pave over the area. And and these these two trees absolutely should not be cut. They these two trees are are absolutely perfect trees. They're they're huge trees. They're they're gorgeous. They're they're irreplaceable. Even if you planted another tree, it just wouldn't be the same. I these trees absolutely there's no absolutely no reason to cut these trees. >> Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. >> I will ask if there are qu are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. Councelor Moley, go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. through you to staff uh on this item. My understanding is we had previously deferred it as you may recall um in order to allow for additional work to save the trees. My understanding is there has been some resolution um realized with the applicant and owner and that there no longer require an a permit to remove or they're no longer um in a position to remove but rather to injure. Is that correct? uh through the chair that is correct. >> So if I move staff recommendations today uh which is to deny the permit to remove um do staff have the sufficient authorities to proceed with the necessary permissions to injure without this um community council's intervention. >> That's correct. >> Great. Thank you very much. Those are all my questions. >> Thank you. Uh are there any other questions of staff? Seeing none, members wishing to speak. Councelor Mley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, and with deep gratitude and appreciation to the applicant on this file. I know we asked them to go back and do more work to in fact save these trees. Um, this is a really critical part of our community, the not only the incredibly beneficial natural aspects of what the trees provide for us in our community in terms of fresh and clean air. Um, but also just the shade uh as well as we navigate more and more extreme temperatures. But this is really a cornerstone of the Atobbico community is our beautiful healthy tree canopy. Um the maintenance and protection of it and the continued um building out of it as we do shift uh and continue to receive more growth and density. We really need to fight hard and every tree really does matter. So we are really pleased about the outcome here. I will be moving the staff recommendations to deny the permit to remove um and look forward to staff's continued good work with the applicant so they can realize their vision for the property while also maintaining uh and sustaining those trees there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Uh anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none, um on the motion by uh councelor Mley to adopt all staff Rex. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Actually, members, there is one more item of new business. Um, it's from me. Uh, and I will move a motion to introduce it. All those in favor? Any opposed? That's carried. Sorry, the the clerk will put it on the screen. I'm moving too quickly. I'm sorry. So, this is relating to parking. So, we'll circulate that. Um, all those in favor, any opposed? That carries. Okay. Our next item, we have a still a couple of more items with deputations. Uh, the first one is uh that's remaining is EY 32.8 for Bington Avenue, a request for fence exemption to the Toronto Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. Uh, our speaker is Mark Fabris. Is Mark here or online? Hello, Mark. Uh, Steven Holiday from the Utopbokco York Community Council. We do not have Mark. I'll ask if there's anyone else uh here to speak to the item for Bington Avenue. >> No. Okay. Uh questions of staff on this item. >> No, no, no. I I don't uh I have questions of staff. I do have um a motion put on the screen. I have spoken. We we have spoken to staff and the applicant >> to speak. You want to speak? >> I'm going to speak. >> Okay. Sorry. >> Professor Nunzetta to speak. >> Yes. So, there's my motion. And I have spoken to staff and the resident and I guess he couldn't get through because I was told he was online. um that uh at Tobocco York Community Council we uh I move the alternate recommendation grant the application for application for fence exception permit at poor Bitton Avenue be approved to permit the installation of a Juliet style gate and enclosure that does not comply with section 447.13 C3 of the Toronto M municipal code chapter 447 fences and that approval be conditional upon found the property owner satisfying all require requirements to the satisfaction of the executive director, municipal licensing and standards, including inspection and final approval to ensure that the proposed enclosure provides adequate safety and restricts access to the pool area. Now, I did give the copy of the motion to staff and uh and they've seen it and they agree with it. Now, this this one here is one of the good ones. um he didn't actually put up a fence and then ask for an exemption. He actually called the city and asked for advice uh before he did it, which is good because at least you're able to work with the applicant on uh trying to address some of the issues and that's really why I'm moving this. I did have an on-site meeting with the resident and uh I was very satisfied on what his recommendation is and we did speak to city staff on it and they were satisfied as well and they support the amendment that I have before you. I'm just going to ask for a recorded vote. Uh, may I have a recorded vote, please? >> Recorded vote on the amendment from councelor Nunata. All those in favor, councelor Peruta, councelor Niana, councelor Morley, and any opposed? Councelor Holidayiday. That motion carries. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Um, our next item is EY 32.950 Northland Avenue, a request for fence exemption, the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. Uh, we have a number of registered speakers. Our first speaker is Michael Dilva. Is Michael here or online? >> Welcome, Michael. Um, come on up to the front, please. You've got five minutes. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Um, I appreciate you allowing me to be here to speak today. Um, I'm here because like the speaker actually just in the last one, this particular one, there was no ask. The fence was actually done while I was away on vacation. It does not comply uh with safety rules. It's extremely unsafe. Uh I sent in some pictures. I don't know if you guys were able to take a look at them. I'm literally walking right onto the sidewalk with without any view of cars, vehicles, of what's going on. Um I've already bumped into people walking out. I've already hit people with my garbage cans walking out cuz there is no light uh line of sight to see. Uh by approving this fence, you're going to be putting a lot of people's uh safety at risk simply because like I said, I've already bumped into people, taking out garbage cans, and simply walking. My parents also, it's an accident waiting to happen. Sometimes the cars are parked on our side. That makes it a little bit safer. But as soon as the cars move over to the other side, you're literally walking right onto the sidewalk. If I hit somebody, they fall over. They could easily be trampled by a car. There's also uh other neighbors that complained about it. They were not able to make it today. One with an appointment. The other one's due to work. Um I mean, I highly recommend you take a look at the pictures. The fence is nearly 10 ft tall. It's it's it's insane. It's not only is it 10 ft like really really high, 21 15 2.15 m. It's not see-through. I can't even like there there's nothing. You're walking blindfolded. I I I think it's it's absurd to be honest. It it's it's a fence put up out of spite. Not. It has no actual purpose cuz the other two sides of the property are completely open. So if you can't sit here and argue, oh, it's for safety so people don't just randomly walk into my yard. No, the other two sides are open. It's it's literally doing nothing but putting people's lives at risk. And I think I mean I don't I I don't know what else to say in regarding to the matter. I just don't think it should be allowed. And I'd like to thank you for for my time. >> Don't go away. Uh there could be a couple of questions. Uh so questions of the speaker. >> Council Mley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick question. Thanks for coming today to speak on behalf of yourself and your neighbors. Uh where are you in relation to 50 Northland? Are you the immediate neighbor? >> Yes. >> Okay, that that's helpful. Thank you so much. >> Yeah. Sorry. I just like to want to ask one point because there was a lot of high-rise conversation. I actually work high-rise. One of the first things, every week we have a safety meeting and one of the first things on that list is prevention of accidents, right? So, if you could avoid an accident, it's always a lot better than to try to deal with it once something actually happened. That's one of the main reasons I'm here today cuz we could literally avoid someone getting run over, someone getting hurt. Like my mom has walking issues. I don't know if the f she'll need a wheelchair. then she's really not going to see anything. It's it's it's absurd and the the law should be upheld and and yeah, that's my view. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Michael. I I have a couple of questions for you as well, just factual ones to help me. Um, this was your neighbor that built it. >> Mhm. >> Is the fence on your property or on theirs? >> Good question. Nothing was ever provided to show me if it's on my property or their property. I did ask to prove that it was on his property. Nothing was ever shown. Uh I called out the Ministry of Labor to come take a look. They did do some notes. They also stated that it was unsafe, but they didn't really tell me if it's on my side, their side. That's another issue I actually do need to look into. >> And are are you aware that the property line Are you at 52? >> I'm 52 Northland Avenue. Are you aware that the property line is roughly around where your grass starts between the front like where you own and where the street starts? That's according to the map I'm looking at. Does that sound about right? Does your property go to the sidewalk? >> Yes. >> You sure? >> That's how it's I haven't touched it since I bought the place, right? So, it's been like that for years. >> Okay. Uh, and the last thing is just about the fence construction just because I can't tell from the pictures, but you might know and and maybe somebody else will speak to us about it, but this looks like aluminum posts. >> Mhm. >> And then they is it do they slide in pieces? >> I think so. I wasn't there when they construct this, so I wouldn't be able to uh to give mine. But I do want to say also they did do illegal construction before building the fence. I know when both other neighbors on the other side when they did did redo their lawn, they were forced to move back their uh their wall. He did not. I don't know. I that's doesn't really affect me. So, I didn't really bring it up into make any complaints or about it. But I do know that when the other neighbors did do changes to their front, they were forced to leave a little bit of space to leave um garbage cans and other things. I guess it is hard for a wheelchair to get by on garbage day, right? Cuz the sidewalks aren't really too wide. So there there's a couple of illegal things that he has done. Uh you maybe if you have a chance, take a look at that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Professor Nunat. Questions. >> Yeah. So from the picture I'm looking at that you sent me. So the fence goes right across the sidewalk. >> It goes right up to the sidewalk and I'm literally >> How do people How do people walk there? they you're taking a chance every time you're stepping out of my property to be honest with you. It's you don't know what's coming. Like you're literally walking out and and you don't know. You're taking a risk every time. And I can't tell like a lot of people have told me like, "Oh, I don't know how this he was even allowed. He didn't ask for permission. He didn't consult anybody. He didn't he just did it." And and and I came back to that. >> Yeah. Because it is on city property. Definitely. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Maria Dilva. >> Welcome, Maria. You have five minutes. >> Hi, good morning. I'm scared go the house of my son because the the fence too >> it's okay I can't hear well >> sorry >> the the fence too big I don't see come outside the house somebody coming broke the fence go until sidewalk somebody pass in in sidewalk no see don't see the people couple days ago I come outside the house if the lady come I go back the front the lady probably accident or something because I almost fall down my legs not safe because the problem in my legs the problem with the fence too big no be somebody coming sidewalk. No see if the problems when the mother and kids go out the the kids grow the front the the caring the baby go front the mother and back is the accident because no space for see the fence too big no no see the the somebody come no see the accident the problem okay thank you >> thank Our next speaker is Antonio Dilva. Is Antonio here? >> Hello Antonio, welcome. You have five minutes. >> Uh I'm sorry because I don't speak English but the same problems my wife. This is no good because come the sidewalks come the people have problem. is uh is the same anyway. It's okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker is Raphael Pinto. Is Raphael here? Now is that Andrea? >> Yes, it's me. >> So I have you I have you listed separate. Do you want to go together? >> No, just to show the >> You just want to speak as I want to show the pictures. >> You just want to show the pictures and do you want to talk after? >> No. >> No. Okay. Very good. Okay, welcome Raphael. You have five minutes. >> Okay guys, uh good afternoon. Thanks for the opportunity to talk uh with you guys. Just to rectify this fence is 6 ft tall, not 10 ft. Okay, if you measure vertically, it's going to go straight to my uh bottom point on the land. Okay. Uh I'm going to start to say uh that unfortunately this is uh we have to be here because uh that city demanding to us to take out this fence and I'm going to explain you why after. So, um, thousand of houses that we have around the city of Toronto, explain me why everyone or anyone that has fences or bushes or steps or walls just close to the sidewalk and I cannot have it. Okay. So uh we know that in fact everybody has so many height bushes height fences and uh you know they they remain in there nobody's doing nothing at all technically let's say so can I ask why should we have the same loss for everyone or we are sparing some people Okay, I'm not the only one that is in violation. I took my permits to take my construction, but this neighbor didn't took didn't took these permits to do whatever he built on this property. Okay. The last permit that they got on the property, it was in 2006 and they bought the house after that and they extend the house into the garage approximately 3 m. That cannot even be approved. Okay? There's no coincidences over here. So, we don't know them at all from nowhere. He's just treating us. He treat my wife and I want to ask any woman over here wants to be treated by a man. Second, who has wives over here and let the other the other person treat your wife like that. Okay. So, it's not only him that will be treating my wife. trespassing tenants trespassing garbage on the floor anyone any single one even the tenants they trespass in my property okay for the single day that I bought this house that's why this fence is there to prevent that so I don't think that anyone over here wants to buy a house in any neighborhood and be treating for a neighbor just because that neighbor wants that house or or wants to buy that house or would like to have that house who wants to be like that no one I guess and I did the renovation to create a new look like on the community. What they did nothing at all? What you guys want to see it? Junk or new houses? How do you guys want to be treatful or treating your family, your kids, everybody? Against Eleno is against everywhere. But no worry, police is taking care is taking care about it. He's is already right on and uh some action is going to be taken because they destroying they destroying our community. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. So don't go away. Are there questions of the speaker? Councelor Mley, >> thank you for coming today and thank you for your submission. Um I appreciated uh seeing from your point of view and I had a few questions for you related to this this matter. Um the main concern for me personally and I think certainly for probably my colleagues on council is the safety related to this. you showed some examples of some other encroachments onto city property and as I'm sure you understand uh working in you know doing building their ability to seek permission which is similar to what's happening today right you can get an exemption to be on city land and that's likely the case not saying everyone right we know oftent times people go ahead and build ask for permission after that's not what we prefer to see you know it's important to be aligned with the bylaw where you can so my question to you is the biggest concern that I see here is the sighteline issue. Uh we heard the example given if a mom's walking with a stroller and the stroller's out first and there's a driveway or parking cars coming. What is how do people what are your thoughts about the issues and concerns raised related to the safety uh with this fence going all the way to the edge and the lack of sighteline? Can you talk to me about that? >> Okay. Um I'm going to answer to your question. First of all, I'm not close to any driveway. I know that you are talking about the people that is crossing >> that is crossing on the sidewalk. So, this fence wasn't be there before. >> Okay. He's been running until to the back of the house only. >> Mhm. >> Until this problems start. >> Mhm. >> And uh remember when you saw this picture from this house, how it was the bushes of my neighbor? Even taller than the fence. So, who is hiding the people that coming from the sidewalk or just blocking the people that come from the sidewalk or from the drivers? Me or them? >> So, well, the fence is certainly creating an issue. Again, I can't see through the fence to the other side, so I can't speak to the bushes and shrubs, but I appreciate your response. Uh, I'll leave that question there. Thanks, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Other questions? Uh, I have a couple. So, what was there before the fence? >> Sorry. >> What was there before the fence? Anything? >> Nothing at all. >> Nothing there. >> They just cut the bush three days ago for convenience for this meeting. >> Did you build the fence or company? >> No, I did. >> You put it. Okay. >> I did. I took permits and I did. Well, for fans technically, you don't have permits. Correct. But >> did you do a survey? >> Yes, I have. >> You >> right online? >> You you built it online? >> Right online. Okay. Actually, actually on the back I leave some space for them. >> You you built it on the line between you and your neighbor. What about with the >> on my side? >> What about you put it on your side? >> Yes. >> Okay. What about with the city on the front? Did you build it on city land or on your land? >> Well, that's technically they are saying that on city land because they are saying from the sidewalks that's 2.4 m if I'm not wrong. But it was on my side. Not never on his side. >> Are you certain that your fence is on or off city land? >> The two last words as long as I know for 2 point 2 2.4 m from the sidewalk. As long as I know looks like he's on a city property. That's whatever we can call. >> When you did your survey, did they mark the end of your property line? Sorry. >> When you did your survey, right, you said I asked, did you have the surveyors tell you which property to build on? You said yes. Right. Did I hear that right? You surveyors came? >> Yes. So, actually, we have a a cross point on the sidewalk line up like property line, not uh between me or city property. >> Did you arrange for the cross line or was it there already? >> The cross line? >> Yeah, the cross line. No, no, they did. >> Who did >> the the surveyors? >> Who surveyors? >> Uh belongs to uh MXL engineering. >> Did you order the surveyors? >> I I asked to have a surveyor there to know how far I'm going from my property line. >> So, this was before or after you put the fence >> before. >> And then >> away before. >> So, they marked one plane. Did they mark the end point of your property? Usually they put spikes on either end. >> Uh, actually we don't have spike there. And you can confirm that too. We have the cross mark on the sidewalk. >> And did he did he give you the distance from the cross mark on the sidewalk to your property line? >> The offset you mean? >> No. That Well, okay. The offset from the cross mark. Yeah. Did he give it to you? Well, might on the drawings that I can look at, but doesn't explain me if that's that shows city property or say city property or my property, whatever. >> So, do you agree or disagree that you built some of your fence on the city's land? >> Well, according on the law, 2.4 m. Yes. If I'm agree that I'm doing wrong, no, because everybody has it. And I I did that to prevent my family, to protect my family, like anyone that I guess can do it or probably anyone can have it. >> Okay. And you you didn't get a permit for the fence on the city land. >> No, they designed it. They send it in, but I know uh the >> You did beautiful work in front of the house. I saw the picture. >> We try. Thank you. Yes. Did you get permits for those on the >> everything >> on the city land? >> Everything. Every single piece. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> No problem. Thank you very much. >> Any other questions? Seeing none, thank you for speaking to us. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'll ask is there anyone else to speak to this item? >> Seeing none. >> Questions. >> Questions of staff. Councelor Nunzi. >> I have to Okay. I just questions of staff. if you can comment please on on this fence and what portion is on city property and how high is the fence? The height of the to you the through you the counselor the height of the fence is um 2.13 meters that's including the panel and the post and the first two panels are on city property. The last three panels are private property. >> Okay. And you informed the resident uh the portion that's on city property to remove that. >> Uh the owner of the property was informed that the first two panel they would have to >> remove >> not remove um consult with transportation department for an encroachment agreement >> and they didn't >> that I can't comment on. >> Okay. Because we don't have an an encroachment. There was there wasn't an application in print. >> No, we don't have it. They never applied. No. Um, okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions, >> Councelor Mley? >> Sorry. Sorry. My apologies. Um, I just wanted to comment on the materiality of this fence. It's not a wooden fence, which as far as I can tell. Um, can you comment on what type of material was used to build this fence and whether it is itself compliant with the city bylaw >> through you the counselor? The material is um aluminum post which is type of metal type of and um composite board. >> Okay. >> It's similar to wood but it's >> has Yeah, I'm following you. Okay. And it's compliant materials. Yes. >> Okay. That's just one clarification. Thank you. >> Any other questions of staff? Seeing none, councelor Nunziata. So, I'll move the staff recommendation to reviews uh the exemption. Um my staff did speak to the residents and inform them uh the portion that was on city property that they would have to uh get an encroachment agreement, but unfortunately um they were not or they did not want to at that time and that's why they're here. Um they would have to go through that whole process if they want to. Um but um um the way the picture that I do have like it's there there's two panels to remove the panels that's actually encroaching on city property which you would need to have an encroachment agreement and so we tried to help the resident on that. Um so I would refuse it and if the goes through transportation to get uh an encroachment agreement then maybe we can uh revisit that issue. All those in favor? Any oppose? That carries. Okay. microphone. >> Okay. Our next item is um EY 32.10 Pelmo Crescent, a request for fence exemption to the Toronto. >> Sir. >> Okay. Okay. So, there's a technical amendment to the previous item. >> Okay. Move the motion to reopen, please. >> 3100 Western Road. >> All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. >> Perfect. And I think we need to do two votes. One on the amendments. Uh the revised there's a change of three words. The one of the officials, city officials was identified incorrectly. So, it should be the uh an amendment to that. It should read the director engineering review, development review. uh that those words there. Okay. And that's the only change to the motions we approved earlier. Okay. So >> So madame recorded >> clerk, do we need a motion to amend? >> All right. So motion to amend. All those in favor? Any opposed? That's carried. >> Before we complete the item, >> item is amended. All those in favor? Any opposed? Okay. >> Recorded vote on the item is amended. All those in favor on adopting the item as amended, councelor Perusa, councelor Nenziata, councelor Holidayiday, councelor Marley. That item carries. >> Thank you. >> Okay, back up to the item list. Ey 32.10 Pelmo Crescent request for offense exemption of the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. Um, we have a speaker registered, Benignia Desa de Tomalia. >> Welcome to the community council. Uh, you've got five minutes. >> Good afternoon. Um, it's working, right? Okay. Thank you. Um, thank you for letting me speak. >> Bend it down a little bit. >> A little bit more. >> Thank you. >> It's okay. Yeah. >> Very good. >> Yes. Um well um the reason um we are here to speak to all of you it's because um we think that everybody has the right to privacy when it comes to our backyard. Our backyard is the extension of our living space. Um, we want like to be able to, you know, talk to our family. Our guests come over. Uh, we like to act zilly. I want to be able to wear shorts or my top with my husband. We are planning to we are in the process to build um a small um swimming pool. You know, my boys coming over with the girls, the fiance, the wife. So, we want to enjoy our backyard. Um, there are these two windows, big windows with our neighbors. Um, just to let you know, we all I mean, we have a very good relationships with the neighbors. So, with my husband, we came up with the idea to build um green screen uh and we put artificial grass, we put some flowers so we have some privacy. And since uh we be we build this uh green screen uh it feels so good when we just go to the backyard and uh we are not we don't feel watched by our neighbors even though um it's not intentionally but you know the the windows are a little bit higher than our lower backyard. So it's even though it's not intentionally leave there the people are able to see uh it's normal right. So we just would like um I mean this green screen we feel it doesn't bother anybody. It's built in our own property. is not as long as the our private fence. Just um we just managed to when we build that we just managed to have some privacy for our own and for our family without uh being rude to our neighbors without any we are not trying to make any conflict. We just try to have some limit to our neighbors boundaries and just set up some set up some privacy without hurt hurt hurting anybody. You know that's what we that's our intention you know since we have that green screen our private life in our backyard it's been so nice and we feel relief we feel free like we feel great you know we just walk to the backyard and it's like we have the freedom that we want right without anybody watching us intentionally or not intentionally but That's how we feel right now, you know. I mean, that's all we we want to say. >> Thank you. Are there some questions of the speak? Are there questions of the speaker? >> Yeah, I have a question. >> Councelor Nun. Um, so when when did you put up the fence >> that the Greek screen uh um I mean um I called um at your office and I talked to Jesse and I was talking to Gino and Gino recommend me uh to build a um um green fence um as part of the a part to fix to fix the and to fix this and to have some privacy before I went ahead and do it. you know that I I I called the office. So he gave me the idea and I mean I mean it's it's just a small portion of the green fence. It's not like so long and big, you know, >> so we can have some privacy. We I put flowers so you can we can have >> So you went you went a little different than what was recommended, right? You added more on than what was recommended. >> I added like maybe two more post. >> Two more posts. >> Yeah. I mean if you want me to reduce it a little bit that's not a problem. I just we just want some privacy. That's all we are asking for. >> No, I understand because you did speak to my office and we recommended you remove those posts. Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah, that's we don't have a problem as long as we have the privacy that we want. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Any further questions of the speaker? Seeing none questions of uh sorry, are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. >> Questions of staff. >> I have a question. >> Uh so in your comments, uh you said that you received a complaint from a member of the public and and no notice of violation was issued at that time, right? So when you went and inspected it, there was no violation >> through you, the chair. Um the complaint came in through a complaint through the member of the public and um an officer attended and then the owner advised that they would um submit a fence exemption application. So we hold off on um issuing the notice. >> Okay. So when you when you went and inspected inspected the fence, did you advise the resident what they have to do to comply >> through you the counselor? Yes. and and they understood that part >> through you the counselor. That's correct. >> Okay. And they didn't make any changes at all. >> No changes. >> Okay. >> Um yeah. >> Uh any other questions of staff? Actually, one one more question to staff. Maybe we can come to a resolution now. So, if we the changes that you would be comfortable with and that you would support if we were to approve this today, what what would that change be? What would the recommendation be >> through you the counselor? Um MLS do not take a position to give a recommendation. I know, but what do they have to do like >> Oh, bring the fence down into compliance to complied with the height requirements. >> Okay. So, that would be it. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Thanks. >> Any other questions? Seeing none, members wishing to speak. Well, I would like to um move Well, I don't have a motion ready, so maybe you can go to the next item and then I'll speak to staff. >> Okay, we'll stand the item down. >> Yeah. >> All right. Um so, we uh we have a few uh motions left. Uh members, uh that was our last speaker, so we'll just go back to the order paper here. uh of our remaining items. Our next item is 32.20. >> Oh boy. This is well W five Lcom road. Our following item is 32.21 reducing cut through traffic which is also W five. Our next item is EY 32.22 Mil Road Infrastructure Review Ward 2. We'll go with that. Um, questions of staff. I'm going to ask I'm going to ask a couple of questions of staff. I I think we'll manage. Um, this particular motion speaks to Mil Road and Atobbico. Do I understand correctly that city council approved a project in the past to install bikeway >> through the chair mayor Newton community council and issues manager for transportation services that's my understanding >> and uh do I understand correctly that when the bikeway was installed what they did was they took uh the existing road and the existing curbs which were 10 meters wide and They added some drop in pieces of concrete to separate the eastern portion to create a bike way and they left the rest of the road intact. Is that a fair description? >> That's my understanding. >> And in doing so, uh the existing lanes of the road didn't change. They just got narrower. The two lanes to two lanes. >> That's correct. and um that is central to the installation of the bikeway. In order to make it occur, it needed to be defined on the street. Do I understand correctly that in addition to all of that work, staff also installed some improvements, safety improvements to be clear, to the intersections of the streets that are perpendicular to Mil Road, such as the installation of flexi posts. >> That's my understanding, counselor. And when they do that, uh, staff will often use those to narrow the crossing width for pedestrians and the size of the intersection. >> That's correct, counselor. >> And would it be a fair description of this particular uh proposal within my letter to take a closer look at those intersections because there have been some complaints from the public about moving cars in and out and ensuring that there's enough space That's correct, counselor. >> Okay. Thank you very much for answering my questions. Any other questions of staff? Seeing none, >> I'm going to speak to this item. Uh, so members, um, Mil Road was a fairly recent um, cycling infrastructure improvement that worked its way through uh, the infrastructure and environment committee and to city council. >> And as many members would be familiar, um, Cycling infrastructure can be very controversial, especially in this part of the city. >> In this particular instance, there were no lanes that were removed from the street. In fact, very little changed with the function of Mill Road. Uh it still remains a two-way street. Uh it had significant restrictions on parking and stop and stopping to start with. So there wasn't a change to on street parking availability. What staff simply did was take the road that they had, which was 10 meters wide, >> and they narrowed the the two lanes a little bit to 3.3 mters each, >> and they used the leftover space as a two-way bikeway. >> And many people would ask, you know, why why bother? You know, this is the edge of Atobbico near the Missaga border. But what was important about this was that it was a linkage from Burnhamthorp Road where there is an existing off- streetet trail that runs from Bernham Thorp all the way deep into Missaga uh as far I think as square one and the top end of uh Mil Road where it connects with Wrathburn where there's a brand new multi-use trail that runs along the edge of Centennial Park and of course connects to other pieces of infrastructure. So many saw Mil Road as a really critical link. Now, the cycling volumes, I think, are are lower than what you would find in downtown Toronto, but this was the ability to install something with very little changes. There's a however to this, though. At the same time of the project, there was some work done to the roadways that intersect with Mill Road to make some changes for this the sake of pedestrians. And what the staff did was they narrowed the opening of the street and they sharpened the turn radiuses and they added flexible posts. And that the intent of course was to make things safer. But when you couple those changes along with the narrowing of the road that was part of the bike lane installation or the bike the bike way installation, it created some layered complications and there's been several complaints. So my motion to community council is to ask that a review be done for all of those intersections and to the extent possible that just some adjustments be made so that the project is uh more successful and and uh enjoys more support within the community. So I hope you'll uh support that motion. I think it's a positive change and it leaves the cycling infrastructure um completely intact and it doesn't um get into the previous decision to install it. It simply has to do with the interactions of the street and some of the adjustments uh of the infrastructure that was placed in conjunction with the project. So uh on my motion all those in favor any opposed that is carried. Um councelor Nani I'll check with you. Did we want to go back up to your item? So yes, I did >> one on PO Crescent. I did speak to the resident with staff. Thank you Paula. Um so what we've agreed on is I'm going to defer to the next meeting and and Paula's going to go down and sit with the resident and explain to them exactly what they have to do because I think there's a little bit of a language barrier there not understanding. So thank you Paula for that. So I'll defer it to the next meeting. Council Nunziad is deferring item EY 32.10 to the next meeting July 7th. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, thank you everyone. Back up to the top of the list. EY 32.2 Liz Road installation of speed humps. Councelor Nunzi. >> Yes. So, I'll move the recommendation. Um the um our traffic study report um actually came forward last month and we approved the the traffic study recommendations and one of them was as part of their study is this recommendation but at that time I wanted to consult with the residents first. So I have done that and now I'm moving the motion. This is part of the the whole uh maple leaf and rustic neighborhood streets plan. So I'm moving the recommendation >> on the recommendation. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh EY 32.21 reducing cutth through traffic in the Maple Leaf neighborhood. Questions of staff. >> No. >> Pardon? >> That was Liz Road that we just passed. This is May. This other one is Maple Leaf, too. But the other one was Liscom. Yeah. Okay. Uh so this one here, it's um it's asking um the general manager of transportation to investigate the visibility of implementing a left turn restriction from Jane Street onto Maple Leaf during peak traffic periods and report back to Tobocco uh council at it meeting July 7th. So, this intersection is right at the corner of Jane and Maple Leaf, which is just as you get off the 400 and 401. And we have a left turn signal and uh all the cars coming off the highway is turning on to Maple Leaf because you have the left turn signal which is causing a lot of traffic to the Maple Leaf uh area. So what I'm asking of staff to investigate maybe during peak hours we can restrict that turn restriction because it it has created a lot of traffic volume um on Maple Leaf and Maple Leaf goes right to Keel Street. So people are taking Maple Leaf as a shortcut to get to Keel. >> Thank you. Um all those in favor of the motion. Any opposed? That carries. Uh I believe we have one item left before the bills. >> Yes. Ey 32.23. Uh this is my item. So any questions of staff, members to speak. I'll speak briefly. Uh members, uh I admittedly was inspired by the work of the Scarbo Community Council and modeled this motion after uh what they put forward and then brought to city council. So it recognizes that um we do have both challenges with uh the TTC service and the availability of parking in the Atypical York district. And so it asked for a couple of things. It asks the chief planner and executive director city planning to look at the removal of minimum parking requirements in the atobokco York district and to report back on the feasibility of pausing the elimination of minimum parking requirements. The second part would be to look at a bylaw or a policy framework which would prohibit new condominium town home and multiplex developments from petitioning for on street residential parking permits in the district. in order to protect the existing neighborhood parking capacity. And that's important because that sends a signal to developers that the city is not here to solve the parking shortcomings that may come up with these projects. Nor are the existing residents of those neighborhoods on the hook to deal with parking shortcomings. And that those really uh are the onus should be on the developer. And finally, the last is to ask the TTC to take a look at to restore and expand access to public parking um at the TTC stations in the district um and to report back on how improved transit parking can reduce local road congestion and increased transit ridership in the Atobbico York district. So, I know that um the Scarbo Community Council felt felt that this was helpful. Uh that city council ultimately felt that this was helpful and uh as I said was inspired to bring a similar motion to the Atobbico York Community Council. So, I hope you'll support that. If there's any questions, I'm happy to take them on the motion. All those in favor? Any opposed? That is carried. >> This has to go to Toronto. >> It does. It will go to Toronto Council. Uh so our last item of business is the introduction of bylaws. So may I have a volunteer on the first one? >> Happy to do so. Mr. Chair, um move that bills 558 to 562 prepared for the May 26, 2026 meeting 32 of the topical York Community Council be declared as bylaws and passed subject to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto Act 2006. >> All those in favor? pre >> a recorded vote. >> Madam clerk, >> on a pre-summer recorded vote, all those in favor, councelor Peruta, councelor Nunziata, councelor Holidayiday, councelor Mory, that item carries unanimously. That motion carries unanimously. >> And I believe we have one more volunteer. >> Councelor >> Peruta >> uh in a nice clear voice. Okay. that confirmatory bills to confirm the legislative proceedings of the attopical community council acting under delegated authority at meeting 32 on May 26, 2026 be declared as bylaws and passed subject to second to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto Act and I hope you've all read that section. Okay. >> All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Madam clerk confirming that was the last item of business. Therefore, the meeting is adjourned. Thanks everyone. Well, you know, we're here. We're here 1:00, 1:30. That's, you know, like