Transcript: Keele Tower Plan Rejected - Etobicoke York Community Council - March 31, 2026 | Summary 605

I don't know who one is a resos probably the other two okay you told me you Good morning everyone. I'm councelor Steven Holidayiday. I'm the chair of the York Community Council. We have quorum and I'm now calling meeting number 30 to order. Welcome everyone. Today's meeting is being held by video conference and in person at the topo Civic Center in the council chamber. The meeting is also being livereamed online at youtube.com/toronto 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 Missagas of the Credit, the Anesnab, the Chipoa, the Hudnachoni, and the Wendat peoples, and is now home to many diverse First Nations, Inuit, and Matei peoples. We also 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 they appear on the list. The list of speakers can be viewed online by visiting the topical York Community Council page at toronto.ca/counsel and clicking the speakers box for today's meeting. Members, the city clerk has provided all agenda materials on toronto.ca/counsel and on 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 February 18, 2026. Um, Councelor Mley moves. All those in favor, any opposed? That carries. Before we go through the items, I will make a brief but happy birthday announcement. Um although the Atobbico Civic Center is 74 years old, the Atobbico uh civic center art gallery just outside the door is celebrating 50 years. And that will be it. It goes back to May of 1976 that it was established. But in the month of April, the gallery will be celebrating their birthday. And I think it's special to recognize this because the art gallery adds just a layer, an extra layer of humanity when people come to visit their civic center. I often see people uh enjoying the art gallery, people of all ages, uh of all experiences in life, they come in and whatever bit of business they are doing here and it might just be visiting the civic center. uh they get to enjoy the gallery and as we know that gallery rotates every number of weeks and new artists get to feature their work. Uh but to make the art gallery happen there are some there's a team of dedicated public servants that contribute to this from our uh from the cultural area of the city but also many volunteers and also of course the artists that uh contribute their passion uh to making the art gallery. So, uh, if you're here in person and you get a chance on the way out, you know, take an extra few moments just to have a look at the gallery, um, I think you'll be delighted with what you see. There's something there for everybody. But I just wanted to wish, uh, a congratulations to the Civic Center Art Gallery on 50 years of serving the community. Um, with that, we will now go through the items. Uh, members, there are 18 items on today's agenda. We do have a number of registered speakers. Our first item is EY 30.1 which is 2775 Jane Street as zoning bylaw amendment decision report and we have speakers registered for that item so it will be held. Our next item is EY 30.2 611 619 623 and 623A Keel Street official plan and zoning bylaw amendment application decision report. We have speakers on that item. So that will be held. EY 20 uh 30.3 which is 2351 and 2355 Keel Street is zoning by amendment application and appeal report. We have speakers registered on that item so it will be held. EY 30.41 174 Church Street application to remove a private tree. Uh we have speakers registered on that item so it will be held. EY 30.5 31 Queen an Road application to remove a private tree. Uh we have speakers on that registered so that item will be held. EY 30.6 uh 280 Driftwood Avenue, a request for fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. I'm going to hold that item for councelor Peruta, but I do believe um uh a message came to me that there was an intention to uh defer that to another day. Um EY 30.7, which is 24 Tataridge Road, a request for fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. I'm going to ask uh that that item be held so that I may ask questions of staff on that item. Ey.8, 8 which is 699 Royal York Road. A request for fence exemption in the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. Uh we have a speaker registered for two speakers registered for that. So that'll be held EY30.97 Delmir Avenue request for fence exemption Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. We have a we have speakers registered for that. So that will be held. EY 30.10 10 uh changes to business improvement area boards of management. Councelor Moley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, I'm happy to move the staff recommendations on this item. Councelor Morley moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. EY 30.11 Grand Avenue and Al Street Pedestrian crossing protection. Uh we have uh speaker registered so that item will be held. UI 30.12. Uh the East Mall and West Dean Park Drive pedestrian crossing protection. Uh that's W 2. I'm quite uh happy to move the staff recommendations with an express thank you. I know that that was um a very complex file and a lot of work went into get us to this point. Uh so thank you to transportation services and the TTC and everyone involved. So all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 30.13 which is Highway 27 in Rexdale Boulevard pedestrian crossing protection. We'll hold that for councelor Chris. Oh, I Mr. Chair, Mr. Chair, I'm here. Yes. Great. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry, I've been listening. Uh so uh uh yeah, just a technical issues getting in. I'm in now. Uh uh on this item, Mr. Chair, I'm going to move staff recommendations. Thank you. Thank you, councelor. Councelor Cassandi moves staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 30.14 Eagle Road traffic calming speed humps. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to move the staff recommendations with thanks to transportation services staff, my team and the local community. Uh, councelor Moy moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 30.15 Ringley Avenue traffic calming speed humps. We have a registered speaker. Uh, so that item will be held. EY 30.16 54 Atomic Avenue driveway and North Queen Street, a turn prohibition. And I think Do we have a correction to the typo? Is that has that been Can Can we go ahead and move it? All right, Council Mley, if you want to move the staff recommendations as amended that so they read North Queen Street. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for that catch. Really appreciate um your eyes on that and happy to move the staff recommendations. Council moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 30.17 accessible parking spaces March 2026. Um that is awards three and five. Who would like to move that? I have an amendment. Councor Nunia has an amendment. Go ahead. Yeah, I I think the staff have the amendment. Um, put it on the street. Attopico York Community Council amended attachment one, table one on street accessible parking spaces to be installed by adding the following location in W 5, Corbett Avenue, southside between a 87 meters west of Mold Avenue and a point of 5.5 m further west. All those in favor of the amendment? Any opposed? The amendment carries and on the item as amended. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh, last item on the agenda is EY 30.18 60 Central Park Roadway designation of fire routes and amendment to chapter 880 fire routes. Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, with thanks to our friends at uh in the fire, we'd like to move the staff recommendations. Councelor Moley moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Okay. Uh that is the agenda rundown. We will go back up to the top to our first item. Uh members, councelor Pussa has messaged me and he is should be here momentarily. Um, as because the first item pertains to his ward, uh, I'm going to just recommend that we reorder and go to number two first. Uh, and then we will do that item second. So, our next item is EY 30.2 611, 619, 623, and 623A Keel Street official plan and zoning bylaw amendment applications decision report. We have registered speakers. Our speaker is uh Peter Pentalone. Is Peter here or online? Good morning, Peter. Welcome to the Tobocco York Community Council. You have five minutes. Please proceed as soon as you're ready. And did you need AV or is that uh No. Okay, great. Uh not yet. How about now? I'm seeing a no from the text. Okay, Mike's coming to help. How about now? Oh, there we go. There we go. Yep, we're all good. Thank you. All right. Thank you. And uh good morning members of the Atobbico York Community Council. My name is Peter Pantalone and I'm a senior associate and land use planner with the firm Urban Strategies. We are retained by the uh applicant for this file, Diamond Corp, and have been involved in the project since the original applications were submitted in July 2022. Um I don't have a presentation to make today. I am simply here to say that we've reviewed the city planning final report in respect of the applicants OPA and ZBA applications and agree with its findings and recommendations and I would be happy to answer any questions from community council if there are any. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us, Peter. Uh I will ask if there's any other speakers on this item. Seeing none, questions of staff. No questions of staff members wishing to speak. Yes, councelor Nanziata. Thank you. Um I will move the staff recommendation. As uh the applicant mentioned, we've been working on this since 2022 and we've had a number of community consultation meetings and the community was in support of the application and I want to actually congratulate the applicant because there was a lot of input given um to the community and we've been working with planning and planning staff as you can see recommends the um the application. So I would just like to move um approval of the application. Councelor Nunziata moves approval of the application which is the staff recommendations. All those in favor any opposed? That item carries. Uh members I do believe councelor Perut is still on his way. Um I'm going to suggest Uh unless there is a concern, I'm going to recommend we also reorder three to go ahead right now. So we'll go we will now proceed to EY 30.3 which is 2351 and 2355 Keel Street zoning bylaw amendment application appeal report. Um we have speakers on this item. Our first speaker is Irene Leslie. Uh, good morning Irene. Welcome to the Atobico York Community Council. You've got five minutes. Please proceed as soon as you're ready to start. You can you can bend it down a little bit. There you go. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this critical issue for our community. I use the word community and this is called a community council because that's what the city is. It's not a monolith, but rather a mosaic of communities. I wish to voice my strong opposition to this redevelopment proposal for 23512355 Keel Street. I believe I can speak for many of my neighbors as evidenced at the meeting held by the city on February 24th in our community. I've lived in this community for over 58 years, so I can speak to changes that have taken place. I'm not so naive to think that change will not happen. It has and will continue to happen. We must, however, be able to strike a better balance between meeting the needs of a growing city with the need to preserve some semblance of community. This area is already suffering from a massive influx of traffic from the north. We have become the flood plane and it has been flooding for a couple of years now for traffic exiting or attempting to access Highway 400. It has become such an issue that councelor Nunziata requested a traffic study be done. The study was not able to put forth concrete solutions since the problem is coming from outside the area. Building a 25story housing unit will simply exacerbate the problem tremendously. As I have stated, I've lived in the community for over 58 years, so I know change is inevitable. I would like however to endorse the proposed changes that one of our neighbors David Pharaoh has thoughtfully drafted and I believe an email was sent number of emails were sent to the counselors. It will place some guard rails on this proposed overdevelopment. I believe you have received the email listing the proposed solutions so I won't read them all. primarily restrict the building height to a maximum of 10 stories for North Park Plaza. For context, for the 10-story height cap, I would refer you to the building that has been approved and is currently under construction in Atobbico. 875 The Queen's Way, 11 stories on four lanes of traffic. 880 The Queen's Way, 11 stories on four lanes of traffic. 933 the Queen's Way, 11 stories on four lanes of traffic, and lastly 10:45 the Queen's Way, 12 stories on six lanes of traffic. These developments seem to have struck a better balance between the need for housing and the need to respect the existing community. I implore this committee to not rubber stamp another condominium farm at Keel and Lawrence to serve the bottom line of this developer, but rather mandate thoughtful growth while preserving the community for the property taxpaying families who live and have lived in this area for many years. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Thank you. Our next speaker is Emilyn Gomez. Is Emilyn here or online? Emilyn Gomez. Okay, we move on to our next speaker. Uh, Melenna Peruchi. Is Melenna here or online? Um our our last speaker is David Bronkill Goodmans. Good morning, David. Welcome to the Utopico York Community Council. You've got five minutes. Please proceed as soon as you're ready. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of community council. As noted, my name is David Bronkill uh from Goodman's LLP. We are the solicitors for the applicant in this case. Um I'm here to give a very very short presentation and just indicate two things for you community council and for others who we know are very interested in this application including Miss Leslie who just spoke. The first is uh we've worked hard with city staff. There is a recommendation in this appeal report for you in favor of the proposed development of 2351 and 2355 Keel. We are in support of that recommendation. There's also in that report a list of preconditions still to be satisfied before the zoning bylaw amendment can actually be approved by the Ontario land tribunal. And we are in support of those preconditions as well. One of them I would note is a further update to the transportation impact study and that is something that we have committed to do to ensure that these issues that have been raised are appropriately addressed before the site is zoned in its final form. Uh the second thing I want to do with community council um and it's in consultation and collaboration with councelor Nuniata um there is an accompanying official plan amendment application that was filed for the balance of the shopping center. I'm actually going to say something that maybe doesn't get said very often at community council. We actually regret that that official plan amendment application was filed. It has caused a lot of confusion and angst in the community. We actually did not want to file it. It actually led to the zoning appeal that we did not want to file with the Ontario Land Tribunal that we ultimately filed. And it has made this application much more complicated. My client does not have immediate plans to redevelop the shopping center. I think the filing of that official plan amendment application which was done with good intentions in consultation with city staff to de develop parameters that might guide a future development and see how all the pieces mesh together. I do think it caused a lot of confusion and then angst in the community that this vital shopping center was somehow going to disappear and disappear soon. It is not. Um, and so I'm here today as a solicitor to give an undertaking that before this matter gets to city council, we will withdraw that official plan amendment application. And I do thank the counselor for stepping up and asking our client to do that and to give that assurance to the community that there are not broader immediate development plans for this important shopping center. So, community council, those were the two things that I wanted to do today on the record. Obviously, if there are any questions, I'm happy to answer them. Uh, thank you David. Any questions? Councelor Nanziata. So, you're aware that the recommendation we have before us is to direct the city solicitor and city staff to intend the Ontario land tribute in opposition to your application. Yeah, there are some minor issues still to resolve and we are confident they will be resolved. One of them through you, Mr. Chair, for example, is a request to increase the number of three-bedroom units so that there's larger family size units. We will do that. That will bring it up to 10% three-bedroom units. So, um, we know there are some minor issues still to resolve. We've worked with staff already and we're committed to resolving them. Yeah. But as you know, the city staff and, uh, the community and I, uh, do not support this and that we will be opposing you at the land tribunal. Um, through you, Mr. Chair, the the staff report indicates that staff support the height and the built form. Um, so they are in support of the development in general. There are some issues to resolve. We are confident that they will be resolved, including the number of familysiz units. Okay. Well, um I'm I'm opposing it as well. Community and we will continue to oppose it. I understand. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will go back through the list. Uh Emilyn Gomez, is Emilyn here in the room or Emilyn join online? I see a no. Uh Melenna Piruchi not online and um Melenna you're not in the room. Okay. I'll ask are there any other members of the public wishing to speak to this item? Seeing none. Uh questions of staff. No questions of staff. Councelor Nunziata to speak. Thank you. So, I will support the staff's recommendation uh to attend the land tribunal in opposition to the application and I I remain opposed to this application as well as the community. I did have a community meeting. We had close to 200 people that attended the meeting. So, we do not support that. Um so, I'm going to be working with city staff on that that we continue to state our opposition to this application. Um, and I'm pleased that the uh the applicant has removed of the item as far as the official plan amendment on the mall. That should have never been part of the application. And I think there was a lot of confusion when we had the community meeting on uh what was proposed before us and that should have never happened and because of that we received a lot of opposition. And as the the uh deputent mentioned, um we um I did um ask city staff to do a traffic study in that area a couple years ago and we've had numerous meetings on that and we did form a committee and one of the big issues is the congestion we have at Keel Lawrence and this application is right at Ke Lawrence. Um it takes it sometimes it takes a half hour just to get through the intersection and I am going to be bringing that traffic study to council very shortly uh with the with some of the comments that were made by Ferrell about re reconfiguration of that intersection that that needs to be done. Keel Street is where you have the off-ramp from the 400 and 401. So, it's very congested in that area and and and and that's the reason why I did ask for that traffic study and I'm I'm hoping that that report I believe that report will be coming to council next month um in some of the recommendations that we're moving. I always indicated from day one when this application was submitted in that I had a problem with this application and planning staff know that that I've always said there was a big issue for me. um not only the congestion but the location of the uh of the um the tower. Um so I I have been very consistent on what my position was on this application. So um I will support the staff recommendation on going to the land tribunal and for us to continue opposing this application and um you know any further updates that um the counselor will be updated on that. so I can update the community. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else to speak on the item? Uh, seeing none, councelor Nanziata is moving the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. And members, we will go back up to the top of the list. Before we do that, councelor Pruda, I understand you wanted to defer one of the items to another day. We maybe we can deal with number six. So, we'll uh we'll we'll go to item EY 30.6 280 Driftwood Avenue, request for fence exemption municipal code, chapter 447. Madam clerk, we have we have a deferral motion ready. Great. Okay. So, that's deferred till April 29th, 2026. All those in favor of the deferral? Any opposed? That carries. We will go back to the top of the list now to item number one. Item number one is EY 30.12775 Jane Street zoning bylaw amendment decision report. We have registered speakers. Our first speaker is Roberto Vendel. Roberto uh is indicated as being online. Do we have Roberto connected? I'm seeing a no. Okay. Our next speaker is Arez Susman. Is here? Great. Good morning, Arz. Welcome to the Utopico York Community Council. Uh you have five minutes to speak. Please begin as soon as you're ready. We'll just take a moment to get all the uh the technical and hardware running. Yeah, it's behind. Yeah, perfect. Is that okay? Much better. Great. I don't know if you're able to see if you have to turn around or if you're able to see on the screen or something. Yeah, we've got one there. It's just it's still blank. Okay, let's uh get sure. Yes, sure. Uh for those watching online, we're just sorting through a technical issue. It happens from time to time. We beg your patience. We should be started soon. Okay, we uh we have a proposal from the technical staff to just reorder the speaker slightly. I think Mr. Susman has a presentation for us and try to get that up on the screen. So, uh we'll go to the next speaker on the list till that gets sorted out. Our next speaker is Josh Newbower. Is Josh here? Great. Now, do you have a presentation as well? I do. I'll try my luck. Let's see what happens. I have a hard copy as well if it helps. But, uh, yeah, let's um Why don't you try connecting that? We'll see what happens. Okay. I'll let you do the take the heat if this doesn't go. Otherwise, we'll have to do a recess and go to the store and get some new cables. Oh, okay. There we go. Just bear with me one moment. Make sure that works. Okay, I'm ready to go. Okay, welcome to community council. You've got five minutes. Please begin as soon as you're ready. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, members of of council and committee. I'm Josh Newbau. I'm a planner and partner with Urban Strategies representing the applicants for 2775 Jane Street. I just have a a few slides to give you an overview of the planning process for this application as well as the attributes of the file and I'm happy to take any questions you have. So just to orient people, the proposed development takes place on the northern portion of the 2775 Jane Street site, which is an undeveloped portion that currently includes an unprogrammed lawn and some trees, and it fronts right onto Jane Street and the existing bus stop right at Eddie Stone Avenue. There is an existing 17story rental apartment building on the site that's retained through the application. This application flows from significant engagement that began before the first application was was made and continued throughout the application process. And that included early online resident engagement meetings at different times of day to make sure there was access to those meetings. An early meeting with the Jane Finch Initiative uh community advisory committee to make sure we incorporated those priorities. A voluntary community consultation meeting openhouse before the application was made. a resident survey and then a second community consultation meeting after the application was made to to talk about potential revisions to the application. As a result of all that engagement, we're very happy to say that we've been able to implement a number of changes to the application that reflect, pardon me, build in and make changes to the application that reflect community input. That includes reducing the building height and the podium height, providing direct connections for both residents and the public through the through the site to Oakdale Park, adding more trees to the site than currently exist, providing a detailed landscape and uh amenity uh concept that incorporates a number of community priorities that I'll walk you through in just a moment. Providing a range of unit sizes in the development and easing traffic by connecting the new building to an existing signalized intersection at Eddie Stone. So, an overview of the how this came together as two renderings of the project is that this will be able to incorporate all those community priorities while delivering 420 new residential units to the housing mix of the neighborhood while also completely retaining the existing 198 rental units that are on the existing site and not affecting the parking or any other parts of that building in any negative way. Just to kind of drill down on some of the benefits, there are benefits to both the existing residents of the site and future residents in the wider community. So, current residents of the of the building will benefit from improved landscape and open space plan that I'll show you in just a moment. New atgrade indoor amenities as well as outdoor amenities that are designed with community input, a new resident connection to Oakdale Park, and improvements to the existing laundry room and garbage bin in the existing building among other benefits. The wider community, of course, will benefit from the 420 new housing units, enhanced public realm along Jane Street, an improved TTC bus station, and a community connection to the park. This plan shows how the site and the new building will relate to Jane Street and the existing building. The existing building is shown in kind of the white shape at the bottom of the screen. As you can see, the new building aligns with a signalized intersection at Eddie Avenue to calm traffic and make sure that's a safe uh point of access. There's an improved bus stop with an improved public realm around that, including integrated seating and planting along Chain Street. And in terms of how it relates to the existing building, the new tower has generous distances of 32 m between that and the existing building. and the podium is 20 meters from the existing building. This plan provides an overview of the key attributes of the landscape plan and amenity plan that was uh developed considering community input and the Janef initiative including as I mentioned before on the lefth hand side outdoor seating and tree planting along a new bus stop on Jane Street. At the center of the site, an improved shared pickup drop off for both buildings. At the bottom of the site, that new community connection to Oakdale Park that was envisioned in the Janef initiative and is in the Janefinch secondary plan. On the right hand side of the site, you'll see the resident specific connection to Oakdale Park as well, and a number of features of the landscape plan, including a children's play area that's available to all residents, a dog run, outdoor seating, and extensive tree planting around the site. We know that there's some community concerns about removal of trees. And just to clarify, there are 40 existing trees on site or within 6 m. 20 need to be removed as a result of the application, including one that's due to poor poor condition, but 38 new trees will be planted, resulting in 58 trees after the development is complete. So, an increase of trees. And just to wrap up, I just want to reiterate that from the outset, this project was was very carefully designed to respond to the community goals that were expressed in the Jane Finch initiative. And they were then carried through into the secondary plan and a redesigned guidelines of the Janefinch area planning that includes retaining existing rental housing, creating those pedestrian connections from Jane Street to Oakdale Park, helping to deliver the idea of the green spine with treelined uh right ofway on Jane Street, improving the pedestrian and public realm conditions, especially around the transit area, and generally contributing to the mix of building typologies throughout the plan, including tall buildings. And this is an area identified in the Jane Finch in, pardon me, the Jane Finch initiative. and the secondary plan as a place for tall buildings with a peak in the Jane the Jane district here. So, thank you very much for your time and I'm happy to take any questions you might have. Thank you. Are there questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Um, I'll check. I have the thumbs up. Uh, Mr. Susman is going to try to reconnect here. Thank you very much. Appreciate your patience. No problem. And appreciate your tech support. Okay. Yes, we do have the best here at I think. So, should I adjust this? Is this correct? That works. Is that that's your presentation? Perfect. Yes. Thank you. You've got five minutes. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And actually um it works out that uh previous gentleman just gave a presentation to introduce this topic. Um so my name is Eris Susman. I am a resident and uh also uh run the mighty Cedar Forestry and Environmental Consulting. I'm an arborist um and I'm very concerned resident. So uh I appreciate that the previous gentleman went up and spoke because uh truly uh the way that the applicant has behaved has been disingenuous and misleading. Um I think what you saw in that previous presentation is a really good example of what halftruths look like. Um because in terms of community consulting uh it was not really done in a genuine way that addressed uh concerns of people in the building. I've been speaking with tenants. A lot of people don't even really understand what is happening um and what the building will look like. So here's an example of what the building is going to look like. You can see the existing rental where we live on the left and the proposed construction on the right. The real issue, one of the issues is that the building exceeds the height recommendation by the city. So the city itself in its revision list has not approved um this level. They said that we can build 27 uh stories, but in actual fact, the city only recommends 20 to 25 stories. In the handout that I've given you, you can also see a list of uh building heights in the neighborhood and you'll see that this far exceeds all buildings in the area and it's not part of the Jane and Finch density area. So the because of where we are located, it's outside of the the region where this type of building would normally be acceptable. Uh also the city has um sent back revisions saying that the units are too small and insufficient for the in the proposed building. Um, also you you might recognize this because it was just up by the pre oh by the previous gentleman and so this is why I mentioned halftruths. This whole area here is currently a common shared space by residents of the building. It makes up approximately 5,000 square meters or almost 40% of the total footprint of the property that we are renting. That area is a green field with trees. Um, and it's appreciated by everybody who lives there. There's a lot of dog walkers. Children play there. So, you know, he's saying this is going to be the children play area. Right now, this is all children play area. He says this is going to be the dog walking area. This is the dog park. This little thing right now, all of this area is currently a dog park. So, the um concern is that we are not actually gaining anything from this building. We are losing a lot from this building and it concerns a lot of people in the building and it's very difficult for my fellow tenants to come to this meeting but we do appreciate that you're listening. Um the Yeah. So that is uh moving. Oh yeah. And then also with regards to the traffic, they will be building they're planning to put um an entrance for the new building at the uh at the intersection where there's a a light, but they're retaining the old more dangerous intersection over here. So there's actually going to still be two entrances to this property. one of them at a traffic light and one just next to a traffic light, which is going to cause chaos for all kinds of turning traffic. Um, I'm not exactly clear why they didn't go through the effort to connect one entrance for both buildings. That makes a lot more sense. They also said that they're going to enhance the space for the building by for some reason building this, which is going to like right now there's no island here. So, um, it's going to reduce circulation in front of the building. Um there's so I you can see this this handout has a lot of the uh the criticisms of this project. Um but I would like I know in the interest of time. I'll try to speed up a little bit. Um oh yeah also you can see this is all expected to be paved which I think is a reduction in the landscaping space. Um, I will get to the issues with the trees because I am an arborist after all and there's a lot of issues that uh they're going to be removing large mature trees and replanting these smaller trees very close together with uh not as much chance of of adequate growth and and truly getting large. And I this is something that I know about and um I'm happy to speak more about it. Uh there is an issue with schools currently next door. Um there is an issue that uh the Toronto Catholic School Board put up this notice saying that there might not even be space that children moving to the neighborhood may have to move to schools outside of the neighborhood. That's already in front of another proposed development. So we have a lot of issues with uh negative impacts on children and youth. And then here's some of the photos of the trees that are to be removed and the lovely green space in front of the building. Mr. Susman, you're at 5 minutes. Uh do you I know you don't have a clock. Do you have a final wrap-up comment for You know what? I I think I said what I need to say. I appreciate you for listening and uh happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Are there questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Oh, no. Councelor Peruta, just just curious. Um you you spoke to the two separate entrances for the two uh buildings. U you you would like to see them what like combined. I think that would be more logical. Um I you know nobody's really consulted us in a meaningful way about like how that would how the entrances and how the traffic would be recirculated with this new plan. Um so to go into that conversation I feel like it would be a bigger conversation but yes I do feel that um probably when our building was originally built it was maybe an oversight that they didn't build it uh the entrance or right at the traffic light which would have been much safer and made more sense. Now, if they're actually going through all this effort to to make this change, then having something maybe, you know, a road that would come through um to service both buildings would probably make more sense. Okay. Yeah. There's a lot of accidents that that happen right in that area because there's confusion often with there's a lot of driveways and things like that. So, yeah. No, cuz uh cuz that's that that's clearly of some concern to our transit plan to our traffic planners as well because they're suggesting um uh or requiring some improvements at the Eddie Stone intersection and by you know by way of like I don't know better I'm going to ask them some questions about that but sure uh they they obviously um have tuned into the fact that that particular quadrant um doesn't work very well from a from a traffic perspective. Yeah. If I could also just just add a quick um note is that um a lot of the items that were issued in the revision sorry the uh city revisions in response to the plan the applicant's plan um the city had major objections to them but they weren't really addressed and they would the applicant would say this issue was noted for example traffic and so on but it it just says like the city says well we recommend buildings be 20 to 25 stories And the applicant said, "Well, ours is 27." And then so I don't know what to do. Just like if you wait them out long enough, eventually they go away. Right. I I don't I'm I don't even know. You know, I don't live in this world of council. So this is new to me. Okay. But thank you for your time. Thank you. I'm I'm sorry you just questions. Sorry. Just one last question. You mentioned that there was a sign that was put up by the school board. Yes. Um that's the first time I ever heard the school board putting up signs. I know that we've always submitted in development applications to the local boards, but there's a few Sorry. Yeah. So, they put up signs. That's I find that there are actually a few signs in the area. There's another one that's um farther north at another building um at next to Driftwood Community Center um on the west side of the street. They also have a sign. Um, is this just the Catholic board? It's I have only seen it with the Catholic school board. I have spoken with people from the the Tdsb who kind of have said, "Yes, well, we have issues with capacity in our schools, but officially um due to the way they the numbers are worked, apparently our schools, none of our schools are at capacity." Yeah, I'm just surprised that they actually post up signs. Thank you. Yeah, no problem. Uh, thank you. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? No, I think Okay, thank you. Uh, our next speaker is Gaelen Durant. Gaelen is online. Good morning, Gaelen. It's Steven Holiday from the York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay, you're online with us. Gaen, if you can hear us. We cannot hear you. Uh, is your mute button on? Can you hear me, please? Yes, we can hear you very well. Welcome to the Utopbokco York Community Council. You have five minutes. Please begin. Good morning and thank you so much for the opportunity of speaking this morning. I am one of the tenants living at 2775 Jane Street and I've been here uh for over 20 years. And so with this proposed new building along with my family and I, we we understand that it's way too tall. I had listened to the previous presentation from the builder and um our building right now is 18 story tall and the others 17 and yes we really like it to reduce. It is really scary to see such a humongous building um before our face from our apartment where we are is going to be right before us and so it is very concerning. It is also um brings back fear about although this hasn't happened in Canada but plane flying into these large buildings. So we really love that it be reduced and also pertaining to the parking as was um parking and traffic as has been mentioned earlier it's going to be a a grave disaster because even when I'm driving home to turn into a building it is very scary sometime vehicles rush you as you indicate to try to turn in. So that is something that we really really love um to be looked into. Um also for all trees everything has that already been mentioned I come in agreement with um my my colleague there but um we really love that the building before the reduce it's way way way too tall for the community is not in the best interest of the community and not the people. We need it to be in the best interest of the community and the people and the youths and the children so that they can all grow up in such um healthy mature way within this area of where we live. Thank you so much. Thank you for speaking to us. Are there any questions of the speaker? Uh there are no questions. Thank you again for joining us, Mr. Ant. I'll go back to the top of the list and I will ask if Roberto Vendelle is either with us or online. I'm seeing no. Are there any other members of the public wishing to speak to this item? Seeing none questions of staff. Councelor Peruta. I do. I have um a few questions of the um the planners first and then the the transportation folks. I don't know who wants to or you want to do it from there. Sure, sure. Sure. Can you put the Can you put that drawing that shows kind of like the building height with the uh with the podium and the building next door to it? Can you just put that on the screen for a sec? Yeah. So, so my question um really is is this uh I'd like to actually back Hang on, Councelor Pritzu. We just want to get this drawing right. Is it in the staff report? Yeah. Is someone able to project part of the staff report? Okay. Just we'll get planning to do it. Yeah, it's the one before I start your time. Let's just get this right. It's it's it's this one here. Sorry, let me just uh 21 of 26. 21 or 26. No, no, actually the one that that 22 of 26 is the better one. 22 of 26 is the page that is being requested to be displayed. And then 23 and then 23. Yeah. Okay. You ready to go, Councelor Fritz? Yeah. I just just from a from a building the the way it it looks like you you look at that the podium at the bottom, right? And then if you if you flip to the next page 23, you you get to see the the podium kind of just sort of, you know, eat up the entire kind of infill, what you would call the infill site, the the park in the city or the park in the the neighborhood or whatever that whatever Miller used to call that. uh the size of the podium, right? Why why why a podium like that? A podium that large? It's it it looks to me unsightly from a functional perspective. It it's uh it's cumbersome. Uh it it it creates a traffic flow through the building on a much broader scale uh throughout um you know the people trying to access those those uh those floors in in that podium. Why a podium like that from a planning perspective? Why do you support that? I just been I just need to understand that. Um apologies. Uh through the chair. I'm just going to hand things over to uh the manager from urban design. Sure. Thank you through the chair. Thank you counselor for the question. Um so in terms of the tall building guidelines and standards and policies in the city um there is a desire for there to be a base building as well as the tower above. That base building does a number of things. So it does provide the opportunity to incorporate a lot of housing um larger size units. It has a larger floor plate than our point towers do and it helps keep the overall building height down because you're allowed to kind of accommodate more of those larger space consuming activities within that base building. It also provides wind mitigation. So as buildings get taller, it actually serves to deflect some of the wind coming all the way down to the pedestrian level at the ground. Um so those are some of the reasons why the base building is part of our tall building um um typology. So so I mean I it it it's beautiful words, right? I no question. But the the that base building eats up the entire site, eats up eats up all of that green space, that dog walking, children's play area, that that that sort of that that area that people who live there kind of need to sort of not feel like, you know, you step out of the building, you step out onto the sidewalk and not feel that it's not just you live in this crowded, congested environment. a building that that podium for example, I I don't know how you get into the floors there. I've I've seen the the floor plan. So, the elevator ride into the tall building, you you you extend someone's if you're living on the 20 or 25th floor of that building, you're adding 10 15 minutes uh in in the morning rush hour. Uh uh maybe 20 minutes to your elevator ride, right? To your overall commute. All right? Um because that's really what we're forcing people to do when we when we push them up into these like very tall environments, right? Or or very tall buildings. So in this in this podium here, I guess you want people to sort of be able to use the stairs more and stuff like that. Run up and down the stairs to to to to access the building because we don't care about that. But but really what you're doing is you're you're you're the the question is why isn't the the outdoor amenity space that you have an opportunity here to preserve for example why why isn't that a planning priority like a place where people can just go and sit and just kind of you know out under a tree. So I think it's trying to find that balance between providing intensification and still providing that open space and outdoor amenity that you're talking about. So there is open space still to the south of the existing building and perhaps the land owner can look at making improvements to that space as well. It would have good exposure to sun. There is outdoor space and more outdoor space here reflecting the apartment neighborhood type context than we would see in a mixeduse type infill where sometimes buildings go more lot line to lot line. So there is setbacks at grade. There are open spaces but there's a lot of things that the base building also incorporates. the servicing, the loading, the garbage pickup, the indoor amenity, all the provisions of things to help make a better living environment in the project as a whole. So, for example, on that note, like why wouldn't you have an opportunity here to sort of clean up, as you say, you know, the the the garbage pickup, for example, and why wouldn't we have uh figured out a way to sort of incorporate uh the garbage from the adjacent building for it to be sort of, you know, housed in a way that that's not out there, not behind some barrier that where where it always becomes a problem and it's always been an issue, right? like so you have an opportunity to clean up some some of that stuff but you don't use it though um through the chair it is a zoning bylaw application so when there is a subsequent site plan application there is an opportunity to make further improvements to the site as a whole and and and two two uh final questions final question it it's unsightly I mean it it looks that that pregnant bubble at the bottom right kind of like from a from an urban design perspective is just kind of like it looks awful from a streetscape and and when you especially when you when you have the adjacent buildings are oh so my other question and this is an important one because I I've been trying to understand it and grapple with this and and everybody maybe we could just go like a second round on this I'm not going to use up the entire five minutes okay sure second round counc all right thank you um the the question is this. So, in this area, we had what what were called midrise um midrise uh height guidelines, right? These are your guidelines. You're you're the planners, right? I'm not a planner. You're the planner, right? And and you came out and you convinced us all that it should be mid-rise. Midrise, uh for those who don't don't understand, it is basically the width of the road kind of like flipped up vertically, right? So in this area here, Jane Street gives you is has a has a width that um you know depending on the height of the floors would give you a building somewhere ranging between 10 11 stories and 13 14 stories. That that would be the midrise guideline, right? Um correct through the chair. So we have mid-rise guidelines for the city that apply to avenues, but this area also has a secondary plan. So in addition to mid-rise intensification, there is also a pathway for buildings taller than mid-rise to also um happen within within the Janefinch area. So there are both options um for redevelopment within this particular area. So So you no longer support midrise in this area through the chair. That's not what I just said. Um urban design supports development at a variety of different scales. We are very supportive of mid-rise. We're bringing forward updates to the mid-rise guidelines shortly to planning and housing committee. So we look to accommodate growth in all forms and that can include mid-rise development which as you mentioned counselor includes buildings scaled to the width of the right ofway. But through the secondary plan process for this area there is also contemplation within the policy and the guidelines for buildings taller than mid-rise in tall building forms. Okay. So fundamentally no more mid-rise in this year. So, so up the street for example, I because I I remember going through that application. It was just a few years ago. They just built it. They haven't finished building it yet. Uh at the corner of York, uh Yorkwoods, right? There's a 12story building, right? I remember when that came through, you you all like were like gleaming and and and and gushing at the fact that it was midrise and that's a 12story building, right? That's correct. And so that's just a few short years. So what's what's happened now? it like from a few years ago to now that that it should be like more than double that the height. I mean I mean I can leave that question to perhaps the director of planning and the planners on the file but I think lots have happened with respect to five years intensification goals and ambitions of provincial policy have changed. Um you're asking pardon the question is what changed yeah that led to the direction for tall building. Yeah, the uh the Jane Finch secondary plan uh it as part of the the initiative the uh the heights for the whole secondary plan um with the uh arrival of the Finch the uh the Finch LRT um and goals for uh resolving the um lack of housing, high cost of housing uh increased heights and densities were contemplated here. Um this these the uh the Jane Street uh district uh district within the secondary plan uh permits tall buildings here um with the peaks along Jane Street itself. So, so, so at Jane and Finch for example, the the issue has always been u you know the density of people for the the for the services to sustain communities and we've never had the services there, right? So, how does how does this change all of that? How how does it you you just adding on without without the congruent kind of sort of you know uh livable um uh stuff that needs to come along. How how does like here you if if if livable means you know access to more green space uh you know access to more uh um you know community type amenities this development eats up some of that and doesn't pro doesn't give anything back how how does that h how do you how do you sort of um u rationalized the two um through the chair uh you know infield development there there is a balance um in terms of the the functional use of the space that's that's being replaced. Um we, you know, we've made uh we we've made every effort to secure as much uh replacement trees, additional trees, um the the outdoor amenity space at at the ground level. And uh we're also securing uh some improvements for the uh for the existing building including to the the laundry room. There will be the the pedestrian connection to the uh to the south. Um but yes it is there is a question of uh of balance there. In my last question to transportation I just need them to uh explain uh a little bit the the the grand ravine the signalization there. So, you're requiring the uh the applicant to um u pay for upgrades there. Can you des in a general question because I don't want to irk the chair this morning. Um can you describe in a general sense what the problem is and uh how the solution that you are requiring um make that all better for everyone? I I'm hoping better for everyone. I don't know if we can get the better, but at least at least manage worse, right? Through the chair, are you asking about the um circulation access? No, I'm asking about the grand ravine. You're in your report, right? In the in the report, we're we're asking the applicant to to basically uh uh upgrade the u you know, install some new traffic signals at Grand Ravine and Jane. um possibly some new signals at Grand Avenue chain and make some improvements there some changes. Can can you just describe for us in in a general way what led to that like what the problem is and how that manages um what I perceive to be uh you are worsening situation over time how we better manage a situation that's just going to deteriorate over time right I really that I I suspect that that's really what that's about right the through the chair uh I believe that is out of the scope of the development I don't have anything that refers to that Grand Ravine intersection Uh, okay. So, so let let me You're referring to Eddie Stone in your report in the report. Question. Are you referring to Eddie Stone traffic signal? Yeah, Eddie. Yeah, because you refer Oh, isn't isn't that what I said? I'm sorry. No. Did I Did I use it a different street? Yes, you did. No, no, I meant Eddie Stone. Right. Direct down there. Yeah. So, the purpose of the signalized intersection um is it's more for safety and control. Uh this proposed development does have an access further south. We would like to see that the access will be in line with the intersection at the signal. Um now for the the amount of generate trip generation is is not uh enormous for this development and it's adequate. So we're asking for a signalized intersection at this T intersection. Thank you. Uh don't go away because I have a question for you on transportation. I'll check. Are there any other members of council with questions on this? Um, can you tell me how many net new parking spaces there are? There's existing and there's new ones. Net new parking spaces. Um, we are proposing they're proposing 253 spaces. Okay. Um, is that blended with the existing or is that net new? That is blended with existing. So there's was it 198 existing units? So it is actually works out to 0.5 spaces per unit. Uh there's proposing of 420 residential units. So they're actually meeting more than what is required. Okay. So all right. So then so there there's the existing and then there's new parking spaces at 0.5 per unit. So if there's 420 units, that's 220 net new spaces approximately. Oh, sorry. 253 is new. New. Okay. So, just over.5. Yeah. Do we know what the distance to the Finch LRT is? The distance? I don't have that. I'm sorry about that, counselor. Would it be approximately a kilometer? Uh, roughly a kilometer. Yes. Okay. Would be safe. So, more than a 10-minute walk. Yes. With a fair margin. Okay. and transportation, sorry, development review has signed off on the transportation element of this uh because our bylaws say no new parking is required other than visitor and accessible. Correct. So no evaluation as to whether or not that that is a reasonable ratio was reviewed because the requirement is zero. Is that correct? That's correct. All right. Uh, thank you. Thank you. Uh, councelor Mley has a question. Is it transportation? No, urban forestry. Do we have someone from forestry? Thank you for your answers. I should have timed myself. I'm sorry, members. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick question uh to our colleagues in urb urban forestry related to the tree replacement on this property. I understand there will be net new of about I believe it's 18 new trees after uh the changes. I wonder if that is meeting the true replacement um bylaw and requirements of the city. Good morning. Good morning. Uh I'm sorry. Could you please repeat the question? On this application, there is an indication there will be net new 18 trees as I understand. I believe uh that was what the applicant presented to us. Is that meeting the city's tree replacement uh requirements? Yes. Uh so in total there are 16 trees that would require removal or permit to remove. Uh eight 12 of them are in fair condition. So they they would required uh three new trees for each tree to be removed. And there are four trees that are involved that are in poor condition. So that's a uh and for that it's a onetoone replacement ratio. In total, we would under the bylaw requirement, we uh there's uh 40 trees that would be required and the current plans uh is showing 38 new trees uh large growing shade trees to be replanted. Um in my previous comment, I have requested for a revised landscape plan to add a few more trees to the plan. So, they're about at least two trees short. Is that a fair assessment? That's correct. Yeah. Okay. I appreciate that answer. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions? Seeing none, members to speak. I I was going to make a comment as well. You want me to go first? Just a brief one. Um uh first I just wanted to say thank you, including to Mr. Susman. Um really nice work on the the handout, clear and easy to read, and for your presentation. Uh these are very difficult matters. I went through a very difficult decision process at council last week on something that wasn't very well supported by the community. Um I don't know what councelor PZ is going to say but I do know that councelor Puta has experience in these matters. I would just say as a member of community council and council part of the difficulty in going through these decisions and understanding the way that people feel about them and these are these are very earnest concerns that are raised. Some of them are central to planning and some of them are bigger than that. You know, so for instance, it it is fair to complain about all the difficulty that folks will go through for the construction, but often when decisions are made on these things, they don't look at the temporary conditions as a reason to say no. They say you've got to work through that. Uh and so, you know, the planning, the permanent change will be what prevails. Um I I have learned as a as in the position that I'm in is that many of these decisions are bigger than us and we have to do what we can to influence these decisions, but we have to look at what's going on around us and the pressures and the commitments and the laws and the policies that are in place that guide them. Uh and so you know as elected officials we do our absolute best to steer a process that is not completely political and that makes these decisions really hard. Um so I will just um acknowledge the work including the applicant who's come who's you know this is a business decision for them to fill in an empty site of which there are many of those and examples all around us and all of these counselors have gone through this uh where there was a space that was green open beautiful beloved by the community but it is now being converted into something that is a far more urban form and that is very difficult uh to work through so I just wanted to acknowledge the people that are involved in that because these are very real decisions that affect people. The second thing I would say is we're back to that discussion about cars and parking. Um I really I didn't support it, but I really regret council's decision to remove the the thrust of the parking requirements because I'm realistic about it. This is almost a kilometer away from the closest transit station. Not everybody can walk that distance. That's not reasonable to believe that. I know that they've they've brought in 0.5 parking. um that's more than what some people do in other places. Uh and I'm not, you know, backstopping it because of that. I just acknowledge that that is a difficult policy decision. And where it really ends up hurting is people that live there, right? A lot of people work, they they they maybe they have a car to because they're not going in towards the center of the city. They're going outwards to the 905 to work at their jobs. The last thing they need to do is come home at the end of a long day and worry about where they're going to put their car so they can get home and make dinner in time for family and get up and do it all over again the next day. I don't blame the applicant on that. Um, that's something that city council made a decision on and you know, I hope that changes one day. And that's that's one of the things I read on here and I think is a is a pain point on a lot of these developments because ultimately it's harder for the people that live there and it's hard on the neighborhood because we know there's going to be more cars than spots and um it's a flaw. Thank you. Councelor Peruten, did you want to speak on this item? Yeah, I Yeah. So, I'm I'm I'm not going to support this application and I'll uh and uh and I'll tell you why. Um we had a infill application just um uh maybe 100 150 meters from this site 2801 Jane Street some time ago. An infill application that made sense. There's an existing building on site. Similar situation to this. They're going to build a new building right beside it. Uh more or less the same height. I think one or two stories below it. It looks okay. It fits. It's a it's a it's a it's an intensification application. It's housing. It's all of the things that everybody says uh they that they want. Up the street, 4,500 Jane seat. Same thing. Um there's an existing building, an infill application came in. They're going to build a six-story building on the back of that. It it fits. It works. Uh all of those things. Uh it had uh also some buyin from the uh some of the local residents there of the uh abiding building. Uh it works. This application just you saw it. It just it's like a I understand I understand the applicant wants to intensify on their site uh you know to the gazoo to as much as possible. Who knows if they'll ever build it. Uh I get it. It's probably set up for for for a severance and sale. Uh, I don't know. It doesn't matter. That's not my That's not my concern. What my concern is is from a from a a planning perspective, we need to to continue to plan. I understand that there's a provincial guideline and the province says, well, we put in this transit line on Finch Avenue. So therefore, you know, everything uh with everything within like a rifle shot uh distance of that uh of that uh center uh has to go to the gazoo or as much as as you can. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. So, we dealt with another application just right up the street at Yorkwoods. Uh, it was Midrise, a 12-story building right on the corner. Uh, you know, yeah, it had some issues, but but it fits in and it and it works. Uh, this one here, uh, it it doesn't work. Uh, and and I don't understand it from a from a planning perspective how, you know, ever going higher. I got it. you know, concrete and steel now and and cranes allow us to to go, you know, to go like a hundred stories in the air, but but you have to understand that if you're going to have everybody living a 100 stories in the air, you have to find a way for them to get down. We don't have flying saucers yet, right? We don't. They have to line up at an elevator in the morning. And and and I know that I've been in some of these buildings where people are running uh up to the second and third floor to push the elevator button so that they catch us so that they don't have to line up in the lobby downstairs uh to to go up and to and to come down. And and the requirements around that stuff aren't expanding uh uh you know quite as fast as everything else. And this whole podium business from a planning perspective like this whole like this blob on the ground is like other you know 8 9 10 11 12 story monster like square monster in most cases. Uh um this whole notion of you know oh we're going to get some bigger units or they're like you know people are going to walk up and down those stairs. They're not going to have to line up at the elevators and and so on. This this this rationale I I I don't I don't understand it. Um I I think I think a lens needs to to to be applied to these things that says that people are going to live here. They need to live here. And you also want to guide development and and and manage where the concrete is placed there that continues to allow people space to be able to to to live and breathe. I don't think this city is at the stage yet where we all have to be on top of each other. Uh much like an antill, you know, like not having any breathing space. We're not there yet. We're we're we're big and we're a big sprawling city. And I don't think we need to intensify to the level that that that we're being taken to on some site just because you know someone who has a postage size lot can can from from from you know uh a property line to property line to property line to property line boom put as much as as I don't know whatever some p provincial you know some distant provincial policy statement says and then then we have to all kind of like follow suit with this flowery language. I think I think we have a planning de we used to do planning what happened we used to we used to do planning in this you know we used to you know try to understand the neighborhood in the community that people were going to have to live in after that. Like did we just throw that out? Like rip that up and throw that out and just capitulate. Thank you, councelor Futa. Are there other members wishing to speak? Yeah. Move it to council without a recommendation. No, no, I'm voting against and I'm hoping everybody else does the same thing. We need to stand at some point. Okay. Anyone else wishing to speak? Uh, council morley. Deputy Morley. Thank you, Mr. chair through you. Um I do appreciate uh the comments of the local counselor and the concerns that were shared here today as well as from the deputants and the folks who joined us to share their sides of um the experience to date on this application. Uh I asked a few questions about trees. I do appreciate the value and importance especially of healthy and distinctive trees. Um they're very difficult to replace and so at least the very minimum meeting the city's requirements if not exceeding them I think is helpful. I also appreciated the comments from our colleagues in urban forestry and urban uh uh planning rather and design around the opportunities on the south side of the existing building to potentially green that space to look at um supporting the existing residents within the existing building as you are proposing to change you know the nature of their community in a significant way. This is the reality in Atobbico and across many of our wards is that we're under a lot of pressure to absorb significant growth and density especially in growth centers. I understand this is not necessarily one of those. I have many in my ward and we've been really having to make difficult tradeoffs um and compromises frankly in communities that are used to lots of blue sky, lots of green trees um and a healthy mature tree canopy connected systems etc. Um, I appreciate that when we look at density like this, we're asking existing residents to give up something and they shouldn't be asked to give up something and make space in their communities for for more and for others without something, you know, benefiting them as well. So, appreciating that there are some notes around improvements existing laundry room of the building etc. But I do think as this journey continues um that the consideration uh for the existing tenants and their views and desires for the uh future state of the property are really critically important to get to uh a good way forward. Um but I will be supporting the staff recommendations. Uh and I'll leave that there. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Um I I will u as chair I'll move the recommendations forward and ask the clerk to provide a recorded vote. All those in favor of adopting the item before you councelor Mley. All those opposed councelor Pera councelor Nziata councelor Holiday that item fails. It moves to council without recommendation. Uh just for clarity for those that are not familiar with the process uh this is uh the first stop. It goes to city council as an agenda item. It goes without recommendations uh which means that city council will do something uh else with it and I can't tell you what that is. Uh just so that members that are not familiar with the process understand what that means. Thank you. We'll go to our uh our next item. Uh that is EY 30.41 174 Church Street application to remove a private tree. We do have uh speakers on that item. If you're patient with the chair to allow me to move my paperwork. Uh, our first speaker is Craig Race from Craig Race Architecture Incorporated. Is Craig here in the chamber or online? Welcome to community council. Uh, Mr. Ree, good morning. Got five minutes. Please proceed. Just test that mic. Can you hear me? Okay. Bend it up a little bit. How's that? Much better. Go ahead. Thank you. Uh, I'm the architect for the application. and I was asked to speak today uh by the developers to walk you through what the application is briefly. Um this application is for an as of right forplex uh with parking in the rear yard accessed off of a flanking street. It's important to note what's not part of this application. The site is entitled to five units, but there are only four being pursued. Excuse me. What's unique about this application is that although it fits within the forplex bylaws, it has been designed to be condominiumized for individual sale. Excuse me. Um, when we design a project specifically for condominiumizing and for individual purchasing, the design becomes very important. There are two elements of this that have affected the tree that's being requested to be removed. Specifically, the front porches and front doors of the units have been designed so every unit has an individual walkway from the sidewalk, its own front porch, and an individual living space immediately behind that front door. So, these are really designed to be similar to homes. As part of the condominiumizing plan, uh services become very important. Under the front porches, we have a utility vault that allows for the services to be separately split off and connected to the units separately from outside of the building. That's important to clean ownership and to ensure everyone has full freedom over their unit and what will ultimately be their separate properties. Um really I think that uh a replanting ratio is appropriate here. Um so insisting that more trees be planted is completely acceptable. there is sufficient space especially because there is no garden suite for as basically as many trees as council recommends and be happy to answer any questions or that that's all I have to say thank you any questions of the speaker seeing none thank you for joining us our next speaker is Luca Paradina from TAV Developments welcome to community council Luca you've got five minutes please begin thank you just give that a little test to speak in the microphone test. Sounds great. Go ahead. Good morning, councelor and chairs. My name is Luca Paradina. I'm representing Terrave Developments. Um, so we recognize the city's commitment to protecting the urban tree canopy, but in this case, we asked council to consider our request for removal within the broader planning context and our sight specific constraints. The proposed development is fully as of right and consistent with the multiplex permissions which are intended to support gentle density and expand low-rise housing options and residential neighborhoods. The building footprints and setbacks comply with zoning and they're also consistent with the adjacent houses on the street. Uh the multiplex features four bedroomedroom units which is a largely underserved segment in new construction. And as Craig mentioned, the basement walkouts serve as a centralized meter room for incoming services, which is important for our plans to condominiumize. Um, and the constraint is the existing trees location in relation to our excavation requirements. So, the arborist reports confirm that the excavation will occur within 0.1 meters of the trunk and impact approximately 43% of the tree protection zone. At this level of encroachment, the tree cannot be retained as the root system required for stability would be compromised. Uh we're also concerned with the tree posing a risk to neighboring structures while we're under construction. Um and yeah, that's that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? I'm sorry. Go ahead, councelor Morley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you. Thank you for joining us. like maybe could have asked this of the architect as well, but just with respect to that tree in the front yard, did you contemplate any alternative designs that might be able to save the tree or was this the only path that you all had looked at? Um, we had considered different designs, but the porches are a permitted encroachment by the zoning bylaw. So, that's kind of why there weren't any really alternatives to a shared path or anything of that nature to save the tree? No. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions? Seeing none, uh, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Jordan Bake. Excuse me, Jordan Barker, uh, from Davy2 Expert. Good morning, Jordan. Welcome to the Tropical York Community Council. You've got five minutes. Thank you. Uh, good morning everyone. My name is Jordan Barker. I'm the senior consulting arborist and assistant manager for urban forestry and arboriculture for Davy resource group. I'm an ISA certified arborist and ISA certified urban forest professional with nine years of experience in the field. I co-authored the arborist report and tree preservation plan for 174 Church Street uh which were submitted to the city as part of a tree removal permit application. Uh and I'm here to speak on behalf of the applicant. Uh, the matter present before the council relates to the removal of a privatelyowned 42 cm diameter blue spruce tree in fair condition in the front yard of 174 Church Street. The tree is proposed for removal in order to accommodate excavation for an as of right foundation and basement walkout. Uh, and I believe council has a copy of my arborist letter and tree preservation plan. Uh as the consulting arborist, it's our role to assess the proposed construction and determine which trees would require injury or removal in order to complete the work. Very often the construction plans we're presented are drafted in such a way that they cannot be altered as such plans must follow their own applicable codes and regulations in order to be approved for zoning and/or building permits. In this case, the builder and excavation contractors have confirmed that their overdig distance uh for the foundation uh and walkout excavation must be 2.30 m from the proposed uh basement walkout wall. Uh and this is in order to conform with the uh excavation standard practices. This excavation requires the removal of tree number two. Uh this is the 42 cm blue spruce. uh as the excavation would occur at a distance of approximately 10 cmters from the trunk of the tree which would require uh full root severance uh and this level of root loss would not be tolerable to the tree and so it must be removed. As far as species is concerned uh blue spruce is not a native species to Ontario uh despite being present in western Canadian forests. Blue spruce is a less desirable species than the native large growing hardwood shade trees that we are proposing for planting uh due to the blue sprucees weaker structure and smaller crown structure compared to these hardwood species. Uh these blue spruce trees are also not planted as as street trees by the uh city of Toronto. Uh replacing the blue spruce with trees native to Ontario's uh uh with trees native to Ontario supports Toronto's plan to increase native biodiversity in the urban forest. And on the subject of tree canopy, we acknowledge that the city has a mandate of opposing removal of healthy or manageable street trees for the purposes of construction uh so as to meet their targets of growing the city's urban forest canopy. However, it was indicated in our report that this tree has a narrow and uh sparse canopy that was measured at only four meters wide. Uh and in order to replace the loss of this tree canopy, we have proposed the planting of three new native shade trees within the existing front yard where there are currently no other trees and only lawn grass. Uh the trees we're proposing for planting are native shade tree species better suited for growing in our urban forest and they will each grow canopies far larger than the single blue spruce tree proposed for removal. We're open to planting even more replacement trees beyond the three currently proposed uh to provide even more tree canopy coverage at this site. For these reasons, we believe it is necessary to remove the trees so that the approved plans can be built and that our arguments regarding the trees condition, location, and species, as well as our plans for replacement tree planting uh more than justify the treere's removal. Uh thank you for your time, and I'm open to answering any questions. Thank you. Uh are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for your deputation. Thank you. Uh, our next speaker is Nicole Curado. Is Nicole here or online? All right. Good morning, Nicole. It's Stephen Holiday from the Tito York Community Council. Uh, can you hear me clearly? Yes, I can. Great. Welcome. Uh, please proceed. You have five minutes. Hi. Um, I would I I'm not a tree expert like the arborist, but I recognize that this arborist was probably hired by the by the um homeowner. Um there there's a simple thing. Just don't don't uh do this uh renovation. Don't don't build don't build this uh this renovation if it's going to destroy the tree. Build build around it within building codes. There's absolutely no reason. The the problem is this Colorado blue spruce. Yes, they might not be a native tree, but I grew up with one and bird's nest. I presume the tree would be cut right in the middle of nesting season. So think of how many bird nests and how many birds you would end up destroying by cutting the tree possibly protect the birds and uh you know the tree does provide shade. Other trees out front aren't going to be the same. Not going to not going to be the same. They're not going to be as big. And uh you know just this is a cosmetic thing. It is for convenience that you're cutting trees. You're cutting a healthy tree because you can't because you want to build something else and the trees in the way. That that's basically it. And that's not that's there. Destroying destroying the the birds and destroying this beautiful tree to build something. There's no point to it. Thank you for your deputation. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. I'll check. Are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff? Seeing none to speak. Councelor Naniata. Yeah, thank you. Um I will move the alternate recommendation and staff have the copy of it. We'll put it on the screen um to approve the request to remove the tree. Anyone else on the screen? Seeing none. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Our next item is EY 30.5 31 Queen Anne Road application to remove a private tree. We have registered speakers. Our first speaker is uh DJ Rajan. Mr. D Raj here or online. Hello DJ. It's uh Steven Holidayiday from the topical York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay. Uh yes, I can. Can you hear me? Okay. Very well. Welcome to community council. You have five minutes to speak. Please begin. Okay. I'm trying to share video. Can you see my presentation? Not yet. I'm just going to pause your time. Okay. You are now the presenter. Start video. Uh, it's not letting me sh Oh, here we go. We've got you there. Yeah. Um, window share. Okay. Is that popping up for everyone? Not yet. Ah, there we go. I see it. 30.5 31 Queen Anne Road. Please go ahead. Yes. Thank you so much uh to all the members of council to hear this. I am the private homeowner at 31 Queen and Road and I thought I'd put this together. I've resided with my wife at this property for nine years. We have two small children and we acquired the property from a builder and we believe the tree was actually planted by the builder who was the original owner as well. Uh the tree of concern is a honeyloust tree. Uh just talking to some arborists, it's very fast growing and after living here for nine years, I could attest to the fact that it's like a weed. It does grow very fast. And it can cause property damage with the aggressive roots that it does have. And it is known to cause damage to foundations of houses. And as we have witnessed time and again, but at a small level, there is branches that fall off. So we do have services coming in and taking a look at this. The issues with it is I personally think the builder put it too close to the house originally. It is growing very rapidly and I'm worried about the house foundation. It does come right over our family room. So there is a potential risk uh with winds. We have had trees come down in the neighborhood and take out power lines uh one most recently in 2024. We have actually had arborists come in almost every second year and we've had two levers removed already from the tree as a safety precaution. And I do have a neighbor that has been very aggressive about demanding the tree be removed uh multiple times. Um but that's a side issue. I thought some pictures would highlight this. This is a house and you can see the tree here and the blue arrows just point to one of the levers that was removed. I actually got up on the house and I thought I'd take a look from that perspective and there's the two levers that have been removed. But you can just see how it's relatively close to the house from this projection. And then I have another shot that just shows where it is in perspective to the house. Now what have we done over the last year? We actually had the property rellandscaped in the back and we actually had 18 trees added to our property. Uh these are beach trees that were added by Hollander Landscaping and my wife were big proponents for trees. When her father passed away, we actually uh donated money to the city to put a tree in the park adjacent to us. Uh and my wife's not happy I got onto the roof to take these pictures. Uh these are the pictures of the beach trees that went in uh last year on the property just to show that they are real. Uh and we are willing to plant additional replacement trees or cash in the for consideration of removal of this tree and we thank council for considering our concerns. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Um Deputy Mayor Morley, please go ahead. Thank you um for for joining us and thank you for your deputation this morning. Um I hadn't previously heard I just want to confirm. Had you or your wife been in touch with my office on this matter previously? I don't know actually because she's working uh possibly. Okay. Uh you are involved with her regarding a building project for a medical clinic. Okay. Um I don't have a a record of that in my office and typically we do appreciate the opportunity to connect in directly maybe come out on this. Um so just wanted to clarify um to make sure that the information I have is correct on that. Um with respect to the safety concerns that you mentioned related to dead branches, you dangerously went on the roof uh and did indicate that there has been some work happening on an every other year basis to address deadwood within the crown. Is that a fair? Well, also the lever. So, this tree grows so fast that branches then the major trunk branches that come off uh have projected right across the building. Uh and the worry is that if one of those breaks off, the weight of it will just come right through the house. How many of Okay, sorry to interject. Two of those removed so far. You have two branches of that nature hanging over the house you mentioned that we had removed. that you had removed. Okay. So, are there any remaining branches overhanging the house from this tree at this time? There there are, but they aren't at a size right now that require removal. Okay. Um, and you understand obviously that this uh forestry staff have assessed the tree as healthy and maintainable and I'm not recommending removal of the tree. Yes. And that's why I wanted to point out how we have planted extra trees on our own before even this happened and we're willing to consider what you would propose in terms of planting additional trees or cash and loot. Okay. Thank you for that. I will ask some questions of staff as well uh and we'll follow up. Thank you. Okay. Sorry about the the uh procedural thing. I wasn't aware of that. No, that's okay. We just like to do our homework and get ahead of things. Thank you so much. Thank you. Any other questions of this speaker? Seeing none, our next speaker is Nicole Curado. Now, we know Nicole is online. Welcome back, Nicole. Uh to the Utopbico York Community Council. Uh you have five minutes. Please proceed. But can you hear me? I'm I'm sorry your volume is a little bit low. Okay. Much better. Go ahead. But I was so regarding the so-called leaf tree uh honey locust is not actually locust is uh actually native species in Ontario that the honey locust is soalled because it's that it's very similar to the tamarind tamarind fruit that John the Baptist ate. Locus of wild highly refers to to uh chutney meat made from tamarind sauce from tamarind bean. And uh so the this tree is a a native but it's also a food source for wildlife and for people. It it the the beans are are very healthy and the tree is also adding nitrogen to the to the lawn and to the garden because the tree is also a living because it it produces beans. So that any wolf beans and the wolfine is it's it's similar to the tamarind and it's um and if you're cutting this tree would be cutting it during nesting season when uh there'd be a lot of birds a lot of nesting in that native honey focus tree. because this is start we're starting vesting season. So this tree is probably dropping any any uh thing heavier than we uh this tree is healthy and maintaining with honey tree out front. I've seen honey trees from where I live now and they're they're very healthy trees all they are they are so this tree needs to be preserved if they keep maintaining this tree maybe there is a way you know if there's any financial to having an arborist to be able to preserve the tree. I'm sure Toronto can help uh preserve the tree, you know, by by having, you know, forestry could, I'm sure, help with uh maintaining this tree as is because this tree isn't essential for life. It isn't isn't a rare native species and is also uh adding nitrogen to the soil. So, this tree needs to stay as is. Thank you for your deputation. Are there any questions? Seeing none, thank you again for joining us. I will ask I'm sorry. All right, I'll ask are there any other speakers on this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh I do have some questions for our colleagues in the forestry department. Thank you again for joining us. Um I did want to just ask a few quick questions on this one. Uh we heard from the applicant about the um pace of growth for the honeyloust. It sounds quite um significant. Can you give us a bit more context from your uh understanding of the general nature of the honey locust tree? Does it in fact grow that quickly? Are there issues with significant deadwood? Yes. So uh honeyloust are native species to um to Canada and to this region and um um the it's typical um growth form of the um the honeyloust we don't consider an aggressive tree species such as um a silver maple that you may see. They produce large branches. They uh the root system is also more aggressive than the honeyloust. uh as you can uh tell the from the architecture of the uh the branching uh pattern of the uh honeyloust they don't prod produce very large like massive branches and uh the the general form um of the tree is typically is not in an issue but um I acknowledge that the tree might have been planted a bit too close to the house so there is regular regular routine maintenance that's required just with as as with any trees And uh every tree produce dead branches and they require routine maintenance as um as normal. Thank you. That was sort of my next question is around the average maintenance cycles for honeyloust versus the average tree. You're saying they're fairly similar. Yes. There shouldn't be additional need per se of a honeyloust versus another mature tree. Correct. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Um I also noted in the report that staff indicated that there was no deadwood observed during the time of inspection. Can you confirm? Yes. Um we have a uh um uh generic um tree assessment form that staff need to fill out and perform uh assessment while they're at at the site. And uh at the time of the inspection, I believe it was September September 16 um just last year. The tree was still in full leaf and uh any deadwood would be um very easily um noticed. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you. Um those are all of my questions. Thank you. I had a couple of quick ones. These don't go away. How do you locus uh long, thin, skinny leaves? Correct. Yes. Now, do they do they cast off um seed? I think they have seed pods in the fall. Not all of them. Um but the main thing with the honeyloust are the the small leaf uh elongated leaf. Yes. uh that um a lot of homeowners have issues with uh in terms of e getting caught in the east trough or landed in their pool for example in this case and uh so we've known uh we've uh we are aware of the concerns from homeowner for those situations with the honeyloust and do they have do they have the long skinny uh there's the big pods but there's also small ones they're kind of dusty yes yes there are seed pods that are about at five, four, five centimeter. They come early in the season like uh May, June, right? Um as opposed to the fall. As I'm aware, honey locus leave out and seed out later than most tree species in the middle of the summer then. Yes. Yes. I see. That's correct. Thank you. Are there any other questions? Seeing none, members wishing to speak. Councelor Morley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, um, again, I I will be moving deferral of this item with thanks to Mr. Rejan for joining us. I'll ask that you reach out to my office so that we can set up a site visit. Um, I was leaning towards the staff recommendations on this for a number of different reasons, including the health of the tree. Um, but appreciating the proximity to the home and the concerns that are arising as a result, as well as some of the significant uh, alternative tree planting that's already taken place. I'm very happy to um speak further and come to your home to see the tree in person. Um so if you could reach out to my office, we'd appreciate hearing from you so we can set that up. And I will defer this to the next uh community council in May, uh sorry, in April, which brings us to the end of the month, April 29th, and gives us a few weeks to connect in advance of that. Um so we'll look forward to that opportunity, and I hope my colleagues will support deferral. Thank you. Thank you. All those in favor of the deferral. Any opposed? That carries. Our next item is EY30.7 24 Totter Ridge Road, request for fence exemption, the Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 447. There are no speakers. Uh, but I did have questions of staff. If I could ask MLS to come to the microphone. Uh thank you. If I recall, uh this is another pool fence enclosure through you or your chair. That's correct. And it's an existing fence on the three sides. Uh is that correct? That's correct. Homeowner wants to maintain it because it looks fairly new. That's correct for your chair. And the construction material, it's made of plastic. Correct. And if I recall, that violates the requirements of the bylaw which are very prescriptive. It's only certain types of wood and metal that are otherwise required. True. That's that's correct. Okay. And so we're here because the owner would like to keep the plastic fence. Does it otherwise meet all of the other requirements? It meets all the requirements, not climbable. Uh, and are you satisfied when you saw the fence that it is of durable construction and and will stand up to um it the need or the utility of being a pool fence enclosure through your chair the workmanship and the um I would say it's wellmaintained and it's um well built and the height and everything is all within the bylaw requirements. You may not be able to answer this, but is it possible to get those subjective things added to the reports in the future? Uh, just to make these easier to cope with. We could try. All right. Thank you so much for waiting. Uh, I had no further questions. Did anyone else? No. Thank you. Any members wishing to speak? Otherwise, I will move the alternate recommendations, including, of course, the co the clause to maintain it. Um, and members, yes, this is, as we see from time to time, a plastic fence which otherwise is equivalent to the wood, but is not covered by the bylaw. And so, I'm I'm satisfied that it otherwise meets all of the functional requirements, and I hope you'll support granting this exemption. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. uh EY 308 which is 699 Royal York Road, a request for fence exe exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447. We have speakers registered. Our first speaker is Laya Schultz. Is Leila here or online? Wonderful. Thank you. It's still good morning, Leila. Welcome to Tobico York Community Council. Thank you. You have five minutes. Please proceed. Okay. I've got a few photos. Could I just get you to bend the microphone down for me? Great. And are there physical photos? Uh, yes. Okay. Well, I presented some, but I'm Is someone available just to make sure that they get on to the display correctly and that it's off? Okay, there we go. We've got your photo. Okay. Good morning. My family and I have live live at four. Just stay close to the mic because we can't hear you otherwise. My family and I live at four Oakfield Drive. I'm here to formally oppose the fence exemption application for 699 Royal York Road. I'll explain why the fence, its height, and appearance matters to me. We're neighbors, but not really. 699 Royal York Road was always intended to be a rental property. He and his family never intended in moving, living there. So why the intense interest? Um, so 699 Royal York Road is a third property on our west property line. So, we're they abut us. Um, and we've got four neighbors. I was going to send a picture, but um, so we are connected with this 12 meter uh 12 m of double fence, one 2 m high, our original fence, plus the 2.43 43 meter fence built by Paul the owner. So you can see that the one with the little medallion or whatever on is the 6 foot or 2 meter fence and then he built his uh behind. Um, however, if you were on 699 Royal York Road side of the fence, it appears to be 2 m high. How is this possible? Well, the owner of this property dug the foundation of the garden suite that edges our side property line. Then he filled in the exc uh excavation and built a retaining wall 4T high. and then added the fence on top coming to 2.43 meters. He then filled in the excava uh excavation and added 2 ft of soil above grade. If flooding flooding was one of his problems, if flooding were to occur, the slope of the yard would be the issue, not the height of the soil. We've lived in the house for 47 years and never had a flooding issue. Since we never wanted or agreed to a four 2.43 fence, Paul said, "I'll do it anyway. You'll see." So, he built a second fence. On top of that, he built two um he built two uh 2.8 meter fences perpendicular to our fence north and south side of the property. So on this this is what our fence line looks like um on the south side. So you've got the 9 foot or 2.8 8 foot fence, the 2.43 fence, and our 2 meter fence. They're all conjoining in one spot. So, you'll see the other 2.8 meter fence is on the north side. Um, this is not a minor variance. Uh the Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 447 section ETA clearly limits fence heights to 2 mters. The existing fences on these in these properties significantly exceed the limit and sections measuring approximately 2.43 m and up to 2.8 m in height. This represents a substantial deliberate uh deviation from the bylaw, not a minor o overage. The 2.9 meter fence impacts us negatively, impacting the openness, light, and line of sight. While some degree of fencing is expected, the current height and scale go well beyond what is reasonable or consistent with the surrounding area. Equally concerning is that this fence was constructed prior to any approval being granted. This reflects a broader and ongoing pattern of disregard for municipal regulations on this property. Ila, can I ask that you wrap up because you're over the five minutes as documented through previous applications and whatever. So, he the the build first, seek permission later approach undermines the intent of the city's bylaws and places an unfair burden on the neighboring residents. Thank you very much. Are there any questions of the speaker? Councelor Mley, go ahead. Thank you so much for joining us and for being with us today to provide your submission. I appreciate um your concerns. Uh a couple of quick questions for you. You mentioned that there is a difference in the grading of the neighboring property. They added a retaining wall and some soil. Um is it a fair understanding that their property is a slightly higher than your property? Two feet. Two feet higher. Okay, that's helpful. Um, and with respect to the uh the fence, if that fence was not in place, would you have any direct line of sight or vice versa, the neighbors of windows into your property or are you into theirs? Would what? So, if the fence was not in place, which fence is that, the 8ft fence, correct? Yes. The tall fence on the neighbor's side. If that was not in place, would you or anybody in your household have a line of sight directly into any of the units or vice versa, would they have a view into your home or yard? I would say if you're talking you're you're talking about correct. If that were not in place, would you have privacy concerns? Yeah. Well, you can see the right. I just don't know if there's any windows or doors where the fence is. that one on the side. Okay. Well, yeah, that that's directly into our backyard. Got it. Okay. That's very helpful. Thank you. Though, um she's on Oakfield Drive, not on roll. So, yeah. Sorry. There's four properties at um above our property. We're 160 deep, right? So, we have four properties of 40 ft. Got it. Okay. Shorter leaders. I Yeah. No, I'm following you. I think my 40 meters. So every 40 feet we've got a different neighbor. Neighbor. Got it. That's very helpful. And this is our third neighbor. Got it. Thank you. I appreciate that. I'll ask some more questions. That's okay. Thank you. Our uh next speaker is Pavl Zuk. I'm sorry if I pronounced that wrong. Welcome to the Utopbico York Community Council. You have five minutes. Please begin. Good morning, members of council. Uh thank you for taking the time for this matter. Um I'm Pavo Scooch. I'm representing um 699 Royal York. Um we're here for regarding the fence on the north and south side of the property lines that do exceed um the 2 meter allowance. Um the reasoning for this is we had to uh follow grading requirements for the property to uh move water away from uh 50 or four Oakwood uh into the street um which is the the reason excuse me for the retaining wall. Um uh as we were doing construction, we did install um 16x 6x6 post along the um north and south side of the property as well as um the west side or sorry the east side which um neighbors u um for Oakwood Oakfield. Um, as that was going up, we had um conversations with both uh 697 and 701 neighbors um requesting if we're um in agreement to put an 8ft um uh fence up um with their uh consent and I have letters from both those neighbors uh u saying that they're okay with that um height. I know it is past the threshold um and I know it was a concern for my neighbor to the back at Fort Oakfield. So we did follow um the 2 m threshold of that property which you'll see that difference um from the north and south side to uh the east side which adjacent um for Oakfield. Um so um um and I do I do have submissions here. I believe we did also provide that to the city that both neighbors um to the north and south um gave consent and agreed to have the higher fence and that fence um doesn't really intrude onto the neighbor on the back which is for Oakfield. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Are there any questions of the speaker? Councelor Mley, go ahead. Thank you for joining us. I appreciate you taking the time. Um, question. Why did you need to go above the additional height in the other areas? I understand you got consent and you had some conversations with the other neighbors, but can you help me understand why you decided to go ext additionally high? Uh so because of the grading requirements from our grading plan, we had to uh elevate the back of the of the property which then we had to build pretty much three quarters of all three corners of the property uh of a retaining wall um which then led us to do 16 ft post. So when both neighbors saw that, they requested if we were okay to go with the higher fence because it is a 4 plus one development and they did want to have maximum maximum privacy. Um so we thought it was a it was a good gesture on our part to accommodate them for that considering it's a new concept for them. Um but that that was the reasoning. Okay. Um would how tall is the fence itself from the top of the retaining wall? Uh from the like for this point from the back. Yeah. I think it follow the the it follows 4.22 sorry um 2.44. So 8 ft all throughout on the south and north side. On the east side it's uh 2 m. And so you're you're uh explaining that because this is a multiplex development, the other neighbors have requested some additional privacy and that was why they provided consent and letters of support. That's correct. Yeah. I do want to mention also that um from 8 for Oakfield, this fence is set back 18 in 18 inches away from her property line as well. That's helpful. Thank you. Um and is there any room for flexibility in the portion of the fence that impacts number four Oakfield Drive, your neighbors there? Is there an opportunity to make Yeah, I'm always open to conversation that section. Yeah, if you look at the photos, um there's not much impact be on the north and south side. The impact is the fence of the the east side, but that's only because our grading is higher. So, we're still within our 2meter allowance. So, regardless, that's still going to be an intrusion. And they do have trees all along. So, I don't know how much impact the north and south side really have on them as aside from maybe I'm not sure. So, okay. I'm gonna ask a few questions of staff, but I appreciate you answering my questions. Thank you. I'm just gonna ask for clarity, sir. I just I had a couple just so I understand this, right? Y. So, you're representing 699 Royal York. That's correct. Do I understand correctly that the fence between 699 and 4 Oakfield is compliant with the bylaw? That's correct. Okay. So, that means it's less than 2 meters tall, the physical boards, because there's a grade differential. It's It's right at the threshold. So you how how tall is the board? Uh the boards are Well, they were all taller boards and then we cut them down. Okay. So do I understand that the height of the boards plus the difference the average between the two grades adds up to 2 meters? That's correct. All right. And you said the fence was set back 18 in from the property line of number four. That's correct. Is it a case of two fences now back to back? Um uh it was brought to our attention when we got our um our survey. Uh we did have multiple discussions with the neighbor, but uh we didn't really have eye tide to try to see if we could come to an agreement to set back the fence to our property to our actual property line and remove their their fence to accommodate um a new fence. So we decided just not to um not not to create any more disturbance for them. We just set it back to where it allowed us to to build the fence and they also had a grape vine that they were very adamant about and we made great effort to protect that grape vine. So they still have that grape vine. So how is the space between the two fences going to be maintained? I still leaves and garbage and that's a great question. I I'm I but that is that their property or your property? it's my property, but because we had uh lack of communication and no resolution in order to um to uh to have a discussion about the property line. Um I had to move forward with the development. So, it's something that we have to now uh resolve uh you know with other other matters. But Okay. Um yeah, thank you for your clarity. Thank you. Uh, I'll just ask, are there anyone else wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none, uh, questions of staff. Um, our procedures don't allow you to come back. I'm sorry. Uh, perhaps your counselor can help after the item is dealt with. And I will ask some questions of staff for additional counc. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, to our colleagues in municipal licensing and standards, thank you for joining us and being here today. Um, I did want to just get a little bit of clarity because there are obviously three sides of this fence um that have gone up. Um, two of the neighbors are in support of the fence height as it is for additional privacy. For clarification, it's the rear yard of 699 Roll York that abuts number four Oakfield Drive. Is that correct? Yes. And the rear portion of the fence is in compliance. Is in compliance. Correct. So the two sides uh two sides are not are are not compliant but there is consent from the neighbors or uh agreement from the neighbors at that height. Correct. Correct. Um from your assessment um the height is it currently built well and in good condition. Correct. And otherwise materiality and all other issues related to the fence are compliant. Correct. Okay. Um I appreciate that um clarification. I'll leave it there. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions of staff? Seeing none, councly to speak. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. I am going to proceed with an alternate wreck on this on this particular file. Uh it is a you know a bit of an unusual one because of the location of the property and the ways that the um concerned neighbor is impacted because the portion of the fence that is directly abudding the concerned neighbor is in fact compliant. and the two portions of the fence that are non-compliant are addressing privacy issues with consent from the those abuing neighbors. I think that this is a fair and appropriate way forward. Um I will ask and always uh encourage residents to continue to be neighborly, chat with each other, make sure that um you're able to um appreciate each other's concerns and make accommodations where possible. Um, but as it pertains to our purview here at community council, I think and hope that this is a fair path forward. Uh, with thanks to the applicant and to the neighboring residents. I'll leave that there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. On councelor Moley's recommendation, all those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Our next item is EY 30.97 Delmare Avenue, request for fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. And we have registered speakers. Our first speaker is uh Matthew Laru. Uh good morning still Matthew. Welcome to Utopa New York Community Council. You've got five minutes, please. Morning. Uh Mr. Chair, the second speaker on the list is actually my wife, Diana Sta, who's here with me. Is it okay if we come up and speak together? Uh yes, absolutely. And in fact, uh if you need it, you can have some extra time. Perfect. Thank you. We should be okay, but thank you. Good morning, council, and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Matthew Laru and my name is Diana St. We are the homeowners at 87 Delomir Avenue. So in March sorry of 2025 we purchased 87 Delmir as our very first home. We chose the Rockcliff Smith neighborhood intentionally drawn by its strong sense of community and long-standing residents including members of my own family who have lived in the area for over 40 years. So our goal was simple to put down roots and become long-term contributors to this community. We share our home with our wonderful dog, Tilly, and are the proud aunt and uncle to four children between the ages of 1 and eight. And we are so excited to finally have a yard where they and eventually our own children could grow and play safely. When we moved in in June of 2025, so last year, we discovered that the existing fence was built with cheap materials and covered a retaining wall that was constructed using particle board. The fence was not properly set in the ground and was structurally unsafe. concerned for both public safety and our own. We immediately hired a professional contractor to replace it. The new fence was built in the exact same location as the old one, but sturdier, safer, and more visually appealing. Before proceeding, we carefully reviewed municipal bylaws with our contractor and confirmed the fence was up to code in uniform. Near the end of construction, a municipal licensing and standards officer inspected the site and confirmed that there were no issues. Based on that feedback, we continued the project in good faith. Two months later, while I was traveling for work, a transportation services officer visited regarding weeds on the city side of our fence. We had already scheduled their removal, but the uh Air Canada flight attendant strike delayed my return and force us to push the work back by a week, which was when the visit occurred. Notably, the inspector raised no concerns regarding the fence itself during that visit. So the following month, about 3 months after the fence was built, we were informed that the fence was on city property and must be removed within 14 days. Additionally, they claimed that the fence was blocking sight lines turning onto Scarlet Road. In good faith and cooperation with the city, we consulted with the transportation services officer and immediately implemented their recommendation to remove the corners of our fence. This temporary measure was taken to ensure clear sight lines while we work towards a permanent resolution. But during this process, we learned that the property limits were intentionally misrepresented by our previous seller and their real estate team. It appears the original fence was purposely erected on city-owned land, a fact that was not disclosed to us when we purchased our home in June. We fully understand the importance of maintaining proper sightelines for safety, and we are absolutely willing to make reasonable modifications to the fence to address those concerns. However, we're hoping to retain the majority of it to preserve some of the usable yard space we thought we had purchased. We've been discouraged by the seemingly selective enforcement of these guidelines. Since moving in this past June, we have noted many other properties with larger fences, shrubbery, and permanent infrastructure like transit shelters and hydropoles create more serious sighteline challenges in this area. Singling out our property while ignoring these established precedents feels like an unfair application of the rules. Since October, we've been in close communication with councelor Nuniata's office, as well as representatives from the city of Toronto Transportation Services and Municipal Licensing and Standards. We have completed and submitted all required forms and drawings in accordance with their specific recommendations which can be found under the alternate recommendations in the encroachment appeal. Additionally, multiple member members, sorry, multiple neighbors have provided letters of support in favor of the fence, including those who we share the fence with. And we've brought the physical copies with us, but we've also scanned and sent those along in case those are required. We are eager to implement these recommendations and hope the council accepts the submitted forms as a resolution that balances safety and fairness. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you for your deputation. Are there questions of the speakers? Yes. No. No. Thank you for joining us. Thank you. Uh are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none. Uh questions of staff? No. Seeing none, Councelor Nunetta to speak. Okay. Thank you and and thank you for being here and waiting all morning. Um it's when you have a young couple that purchased their their first home. Um and uh and when they bought the house that that house the original house was renovated and there was an existing fence and this is similar to um to uh another application that came in a few months ago I believe uh councelor Holiday in your ward where this is a a corner house the main street and the sideyard is actually the backyard right so it it's sort of fenced off so when they purchase the home the home um by the real estate broker and uh you know they weren't told and so they move into their new home and then then some lease staff approaches them with uh with the summons and uh so for the past year you know I feel for the couple because they young couple purchased their new home and then suddenly they got all these uh notices from the city. So, um I've been working with city staff and actually uh we had a number of on-site meetings with the resident and we've come up uh with I should have moved my recommendation. Sorry. Um so I do have two recommendations uh for the fence exemption and as well as the encroachment which I'll be moving because there's two different items and the city staff is in full support of it. Um and uh so um You know, it's unfortunate that uh sometimes when there's renovations done to a home and and the fence is put up exactly where the existing fence was and then find out that they have a notice from the city and not knowing that. And you know, in my opinion, you should get back to the real estate agent that sold you the home because obviously all the information was not passed on to you as a buyer. and I'm sure that they were aware that there was an issue um with with the fence. So, um I want to thank you um for being here and sorry you had to wait all morning for this, but I know you've been waiting for months to resolve this issue. So, I will be moving my motions and thank you. Thank you, Councelor Nunata. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none, all those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. All right. Our next item, EY 30.11 Grand Avenue and Al Street, uh, pedestrian crossing protection. We have a speaker, Taran Lloyd. Is Taran here or online? Uh, good morning, Taran. It's Steven Holidayiday from York Community Council. You are on live with us. Can you hear me? Okay. Uh Taran, I just got a beep. Can you hear me okay now? Yes, we can hear you very well. Uh wonderful. Please go ahead. You have five minutes. Wonderful. Thank you. Um good morning. Uh soon to be good afternoon, counselor, staff, and fellow community members. Um my name is Taran Lloyd. I'm an academic emergency medicine physician. Um and I hold a master's of science degree in quality improvement and patient safety. I am also a mom and I have lived on Alma Street for the last 14 years. I am new to the workings of our Tobico York Community Council. So, thank you so much for having me. However, I am very familiar with making evidence-based decisions and weighing risk. I would like to speak in strong support of a Grand Avenue pedestrian crossing in contrast to the recommendations made by transportation services. Transportation Services site a 1 hour eight uh sorry a one eight hour study completed on November 15 of 2022. Even at the time respectfully the study design has some flaws. The broader setting here is that yes there is a marked four-way uh stop crossing approximately 90 meters to the north on Grat Avenue. However, excuse me besides this there is not any stop sign for traffic for the remainder of Grand. This includes all the way from the Queensway north of the Gardener and all the way south as Grand turn turns into Portland until it hits Royal York Road. This is a far greater distance than just Grand Avenue proper and a long street that TTC vehicles don't have a traffic stop for. Further is one of the main local roads traversing over the Gardener. Grand Avenue often becomes a traffic conduit during other road closures in the area. Uh so members what I'm going to suggest because there ah hi okay um Taran I'm sorry we lost you for the last few probably the last 20 seconds is a technical issue Sorry about that. I don't So, I'm gonna pause your time for a little bit. I'm going to uh Yes, I'm going to invite you to resume your comments, but if you could back up about 20 seconds, uh that would be great. Okay. Um, I was just speaking to the broader context of Grand Avenue. So, I apologize if uh where it cut off, but um I just wanted to speak to the nature of of Grand Avenue kind of street proper um and the distance that that included. So, Grand Avenue uh actually has no stop except for the one cited at Manitoba all the way from Queensway north of the Gardener uh until it turns into Portland um and goes up to Royal York. So that this is a far greater distance than just Grand Avenue proper. Um and quite a long street that uh transport TTC vehicles don't have a traffic stop. Uh also I think it's important to note that this is one of the main local roads that does transverse over the gardener. Um and therefore Grand Avenue often becomes a traffic conduit during other road closures in the area including closures of the Gardener Highway. Um and so further um pedestrian traffic um currently without any specific direction across Grand uh may cross over at Melrose which is a street to the south um or all the way along Portland. Uh and none of these areas were examined as part of the study. Um these may be pe all people who would otherwise benefit from a marked crossing uh whether that's at Elma or any point along Grand Avenue. Um the measure of weight time in the study is also of little concern for community safety. Vehicle traffic rounding the corner from Portland onto Grand creates a visible safety issue um and is often at higher speeds um as well as traffic accelerating after the four-way stop at Manitoba. I also take significant concern with the 18 hour study on November. November 15th of 2022 was the first major storm in Toronto that year with severe wet snow storms prompting a weather advisory. So even without bad weather keeping folks indoors that day and off the road the volumes over and across Grand vary significantly across any one week and that's the beauty of a pedestrian activated crosswalk during during low volume times it wouldn't be activated and folks could simply carry on. I do appreciate the cost of adding a crosswalk hoping to prevent a serious collision. The cost of this collision incurred from such a tragedy healthcare cost societal impact and devastation on our community could not be measured. Even more importantly and on a brighter note, uh since 2022, our local community and immediate amenities have changed dramatically. Our community has flourished and grown. Condominium units um Empire Phoenix immediately to the east of the park and east of Grand Avenue have increased in occupancy. Humber based population has increased, which all increases foot traffic going westbound across the Grand Avenue. Uh even more important uh closer to the area, Grand Park has undergone Grand Avenue Park has undergone significant redevelopment and investment. Just this past November of 2025, three years since the original study was done, the park officially opened and is an amazing attraction for our community. It has increased investment and brought many adults and children across Grand Avenue towards the park. I sat there just this weekend in one hour obser observed, pardon me, over excess of 50 people walking across the street. I did submit a photo where there's at least 25 weighted pedestrians uh crossing across that street. This park design has paved a pathway actually that exits at Grand Avenue in Al which creates a natural opportunity for pedestrians crossing at Al. I request council at minimum to consider updating and redesigning the study to ensure we are capturing more accurate vehicle and pedestrian traffic. Um both weekends and week nights bring a lot of excitement to the park and during the work week there's many commuting hours towards Mimiko GO station located uh just south of Grand Avenue. I will leave you with one final thought. If we could be pragmatic and save resources, a pedestrian crosswalk uh has been recommended E small without study threshold being met. Please consider building a crosswalk crosswalk for us somewhere across Grand to enhance my community safety. Thank you for listening. I look forward to your evidence-based decisions. Thank you. Are there questions of the speaker? Um, thanks Taran. I just I don't have a question. I was going to ask you to speak to and it's councelor Mley here. Thanks for joining us. I was going to ask you to speak to how much the community has changed in the last few years and you you stole my thunder and you got right there. So, I will uh further that um in my comments as well. I just wanted to thank you for joining us and for your submission today. Thank you. Uh thank you. Uh any uh I'm sorry. Are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none. Questions of staff? Uh members wishing to speak. Um thank you. I'm going to speak really briefly. I don't know what councelor Morley is going to recommend with respect to this item. Um but I don't support the crossing and I wanted to explain why because it came up in the deputation. There was a point made that um uh two things evidence-based decisionmaking um which is very important to me and secondly about what happened on the east mall. Um I would say that the thing that sets the East Small different is that the operating conditions are very different um both in terms of speed and vehicle volume uh in terms of a TTC stop and I think the crossing distance was two was 2 kilometers along that stretch between crossing points. So I just wanted to make sure that if people were comparing it and the second part is about the evidence-based decisionmaking. I actually thank the speaker for raising criticisms of when um the crossing volume was measured. That's important. If if if the the data wasn't captured right, this is why citizens get involved in these things to point out where something wasn't quite right. And I would love to support another look at it if if that's what's needed. Uh but just on the numbers alone, they're not even close. And as much as I want to help uh create more safe environments, I also realize that I just I wouldn't be able to live up to all of the people's requests for crossings when they don't meet the threshold. They come up every week. Somebody has an idea for a location. And so we have to have some unit of measure of where these go in so that uh we're prioritizing the most important locations first. And so, you know, we'll see what happens in the conversation today, but uh people might say, well, why didn't he support if there was a movement to put it in and it's because I have to balance out all of those decisions and all of the evidence in this case, which is very clearly uh that there's a big gap between when a crossing is qualified and when it's not. Um but, uh hey, we'll see what happens at community council. This is what we're here for to make these decisions. But um I thought some explanation was worth it. Thank you, Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate your comments and input as always uh and your consideration. Again, I want to thank Taran um uh Lloyd for joining us today to share her strong support of uh implement a crossing here at El on Grand Avenue. Uh my colleagues and I in my office have been working and hearing from communities since we took office back in 2022 about the importance of pedestrian safety and uh safe crossings in and around this particular area. We've also been really proud to support the expansion of Grand Avenue Park that we heard about. Uh we are on the cusp of getting going with Legion Road extension as well which is going to open up Grand Avenue Park uh and this whole transit oriented community with Mimiko Go um just a few um blocks away uh and to the Humber Bay Shores community and and a whole sort of new connectivity within South Atobbico uh and this Mimico um corner of our neighborhood. We know that Grand Avenue Park is actually a destination park. There's a significant sports field um uh that is included in the third uh or rather in the second phase of the park and we've just opened up the third phase of the park which is bringing consistent and steady traffic um from all sides whether it's the condominium community or or the single family residential community with George R. Gold uh a local middle school up the street to Grand Avenue Park. um the nature of um how folks are moving through the neighborhood has really uh changed and I would argue and I would agree with uh the submission here today that it is significantly increased. I want to recognize um the comments from my colleague about where we fell on the threshold with this based on the November 15th, 2022 um review. There are a number of problems related to when the assessment took place as well as the time that has occurred since and we did have a decision point around having staff go back to rememeasure or taking some action in the near term because of how rapidly the community has grown has grown and the utilization of this really busy bustling park has continued to be of interest. It's a point of of contention and concern for parents like Taran, for the principal at the local school, um for the president of the local residents association and many many other constituents that we've heard of heard from on the importance of creating safe connectivity around this park. Um colleagues will note you come off of the highway there is just along Manitoba leading onto Grand Avenue. There's very busy um traffic at peak periods and we want to make sure that folks that are walking to and from the park as well as navigating over to Mimiko GO station to take transit are able to do that with safe um crossing opportunities. I will be moving an alternate wreck here today on this item and in this matter um that is before colleagues here. So to uh amend recommendation two um to essentially support staff to move forward with the installation of a pedestrian crossing here. And again, I think this is a really important step for us to futureproof safety in this community as it grows and becomes even more deeply connected to other neighborhoods that didn't previously have access. Uh and we'll want to make sure that they are able to access and enjoy in a safe way. So that's the motion before us. um with thanks to community members who have stayed on top of us on this matter and of course our colleagues uh who we are taking a different tack from in this moment but uh we'll continue to monitor this area and look for future studies and reports uh as additional connectivity options come forward. All right, thank you. Uh all those in favor? One, two, three. Any opposed? That's me. That item passes. Thank you. Uh and uh um the item as amended. All those in favor three. Any opposed? That is me and that passes. Uh thank you. Uh our next item is EY 30.15. Uh Ringley Avenue traffic calling speed humps. We do have a speaker. Uh William Pereira is William is online. Uh good good afternoon. It's 12:01. William, it's Steven Holiday from the Atobico York Community Council. Um welcome to the meeting. uh you're online with us. Can you hear me? Okay. Yes, I can. Great. Uh please go ahead. You have five minutes. Yeah, sure. Uh good afternoon everyone. My name is William Praah. Uh I'm a resident of Ringley Avenue, uh street that's one street north of the Queensway that runs west and east. Uh I've lived on Ringley Avenue for uh the first 32 years of my life and I've recently moved back to the street with my wife and two daughters. Uh, I've noticed a significant change in the habits of drivers who use Wrangley Avenue as if it were a shortcut in a in a racetrack. Uh, with two young children and several uh other young children on the street, as well as many seniors, I'm concerned for the safety of my family and my neighbors when outdoors. Uh, I've witnessed several incidents of reckless driving due to speed since uh only last summer, which I have sent uh to Cindy in a word document that I hope I can share. Um, drivers driving into ditches and onto the sidewalk. Uh, I took a matter into my own hands by reaching out to councelor Morley's office with this concern and obtained uh 27 signatures uh on my street uh who uh of neighbors who support the idea of trafficcoming tactics. Uh I hope I have your support today to make Ringley Avenue safer place for its occu occuments. Uh and I hope I can share uh the word document uh that I sent to Cindy. I'm sorry. Did you want to share it live on screen? Is that what I sent it to? So, in the email, I sent it to Cindy because it said to send it ahead of time. Uh, I did notice earlier today someone shared. So, I either one. I don't know which uh which is best. I can share myself. I see the option on here. That would be the easiest, please. Okay. Thank you. All right. Uh, can you see my screen? Uh, I can. Yes. Thank you. I see a petition up there. Yeah, that's the petition. So, there's about 50 houses on Ringley. Um, not everyone comes to the door, unfortunately. Uh, so I was able to meet with uh pretty much everyone who uh who opened the door uh was willing to sign. Um, so I just want to show you um, for example, my neighbor pulling into his driveway. Um, and then if you look at the time the the screen here, within two seconds, someone speeds by. Um, I have something more concerning. Uh, someone lost control of their car. Uh, and my mother's tenant who lives next door east of me, uh, the car drove onto, uh, the sidewalk, lost control, and lost their bumper here. So, you know, if any of the senior citizens are walking on the sidewalk as they do, uh, I don't think they there would be enough time for them to jump out of the way. Uh, this woman here, uh, went back to pick up her bumper. Um then there's situations where like in the morning where someone's in a rush and someone in front of them is driving a bit slower. Uh we got three cars here. One guy passes uh to the left, then someone comes speeding by. Then it causes all this congestion. Um and then at night time you can hear a car's roar. Uh so someone here on the right side is traveling south on Guthrie. They ignore the stop sign and within six seconds they speed back past my house. Uh so last night last night I took it upon myself to actually drive around the block and see what it uh what it looks like. Uh so when you are driving the limit of 30 km an hour stopping and turning right looks like this. It takes about 16 seconds. I didn't drive too slow. I drove the exact speed. I slowed down. Uh so there's that. And then I just have another word document which is a bit more. Uh let me pull it up here. Uh so one you have a speeding motorcyclist. One goes after another within two seconds they just zoom by and another speeding car on one second just zooms by. Um so what driving 30 km from west to east on my street looks like is about 4 seconds. I did that myself last night. Uh, an example of another driver who's in a rush on the right side here. They're traveling west. They decide to jump onto the sidewalk and cross my my house and a bunch of neighbors. And the last thing I want to mention is Ringley is not a street you want to speed on. Uh, we have some culverts and when it rains a lot, they turn into little ponds that attract ducks. Uh, if a driver, we have about 1,400 cars who come by. Um, I would say majority of those people do not live on my street. Uh, so they aren't familiar with the culverts. If they are speeding and lose control, they will end up in a ditch and it could be pretty bad. Um, that's pretty much if you have any questions for me, I'd love to answer. Thank you very much for your deputation. Are there any questions of the speaker? Uh, Council Morley has a question for you. Please go ahead. Hi, William. Thanks so much for joining us today. Thanks for your leadership on this file. I just wanted to ask you to share a little bit more for my colleagues benefit. When you went doortodoor and spoke with your neighbors, how would you characterize their support? Would you say folks were generally in strong support of this action or um somewhere in the middle? Can you give us a little bit more um anecdotal insights in terms of the feeling in the neighborhood for this uh these traffic calming measures? Yeah, everyone was strongly supported. Um I guess everybody mows their front lawn. So, you know, if you're out there for 15 to 20 minutes, you observe it yourself, right? So, there was no hesitation. Even the houses on the corners that are not a part of Ringley were all on board cuz you can hear it in your backyard. Uh you see it uh and there's a lot of kids who, you know, ride around on their scooters, cross the street and stuff, right? So, uh I grew up on Ringley in the '9s and Ringley was a very safe street. Uh it has not become a safe street anymore. Uh people are using it to bypass the Queensway. I'm not sure why cuz it's not that long, right? So, everybody was on board. Uh, no, no hesitation from any of my neighbors. That's really helpful to know. Thanks so much, William. I'll leave that there for my questions. Thank you. Are there any other questions of the speaker? Seeing none, uh, are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff? Seeing none, councelor Mley to speak. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and through you. Um and again with thanks to William um and his wife and those um that have signed the petition that we received um with a request for Ringley Avenue traffic cominging. I will be moving staff recommendations um to support the installation of I believe it's six um speed humps all together in um along Ringley Avenue. It's a beautiful well-maintained street in our community. We heard from William who's a lifelong resident, grew up on the street and has backed planting roots again with his own young family. Um that it's really really uh wellused um and really well um again taken care of street by the local residents. We want to do our part as a community council and at the city to make sure that they are feeling safe and supported uh on this street and I do believe that the warrants are met. The community is in favor and certainly my office is happy to facilitate uh this implementation. So we will be moving staff recommendations to implement the speed Hson traffic calming for Ringley Avenue again with thanks to William and the local residents. Thank you. On the staff recommendations moved by councelor Mley. All those in favor any opposed? That item carries. Madame Clerk, I'm just confirming those are all of our agenda items of business and I do believe we would have bills. Thank you. Any volunteers, Deputy Mayor Mley? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Happy to move that bills 272 278 rather to 279 and bill 325 prepared for the March 31st 2026 meeting 30 of the Atobbokco York community council be declared as bylaws and passed subject to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto act. All those in favor any opposed? That carries. One more. And also happy to move that confirmatory bills to confirm the legislative proceedings of the Atobbico York Community Council acting under delegated authority at meeting 30 on March 31st, 2026 be declared as bylaws and passed subject to section 226.9 of the city of Toronto Act. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Madame clerk, have we dealt with all items? I see yes. Therefore, the meeting is adjourned. Thanks everybody.

Full Transcript