Transcript: Storage Expansion Sparks Community Outrage - Etobicoke York Community Council - April 29, 2026 | Summary 761

Storage Expansion Sparks Community Outrage - Etobicoke York Community Council - April 29, 2026

Hi, good morning. I'm councselor Steven Holidayiday. I'm the chair of the York Community Council. We have quorum and I'm now calling meeting number 31 to order. Welcome everyone. Today's meeting is being held by video conference and in person at the Atobbokco Civic Center in the council chamber. This meeting is also being livereamed online at youtube.com/toorronto cityconsil 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 Hutnosoni 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 you the speakers in the order they appear in the list. The list of speakers can be viewed online by visiting the Utopico York Community Council page at toronto.ca/counsel and clicking the speakers box for today's meeting. Um members, the city clerk has provided all agenda materials on toronto.ca a/counsel and on the CMP the clerk's meeting portal. Clerk's IT staff are available to members if you need help with your devices. I also want to remind you to please submit and approve your motions by email. Staff are available at etcc toronto.ca to help with motions. Uh before we move forward, I will ask Deputy Mayor Mley, I believe you had an announcement. Please go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning everyone. I did want to say a quick note of thanks and acknowledgement to our um emergency services who are on scene this morning at a fire in Kings Mill Park uh at the Toronto Humber Yach Club. Um we are constantly reminded about the important work of our first responders and the emergency services um that support the safety and wellness of our city life and property. Um and again, you know, it is always um harrowing to uh see on the news and certainly to know when these types of um situations are going on in our backyard. So, this is an active situation um and we are very grateful for the quick work of our first responders and a big thank you to um Toronto Fire. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Deputy Mayor. 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, uh, we will proceed. May I have a motion to confirm the minutes from our meeting on March 31st, 2026? Uh, moved by, uh, Councelor Moley. All those in favor, any opposed, that carries. Uh, thank you for that. We will go through the items. Our first item is EY 31.1750 Queensplate Drive, a zoning bylaw amendment application and decision report. Uh we will hold that item for speakers. Our next item is EY 31.2 2 to4 Mandota Road official plan and zoning bylaw amendment decision report. We will hold that for speakers. Our next item is EY31.3 which is 2915, 2917, 2939, 2941, and 2943 Bluer Street West zoning bylaw amendment application. We will hold that item for speakers. Uh the next item is EY31.4, four which is 468 Montgomery Road residential demolition application. We will hold that for a speaker. Our next applica our next item is EY 31.5 which is 31 Queen Anne Road an application to remove a private tree and be held for a speaker. Uh our our next item is EY 31.6 which is 51 BMTorp Crescent an application to remove two private trees. uh that will be held for speakers. Um the following item is EY31.7 which is 280 Driftwood Avenue, a request for fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447. I will hold that item in my name for councelor Peruta. EY 31.8271 8271 Valermo Drive, a request for fence exemption to the Toronto Municipal Code, chapter 447 that will be held for speakers. EY 31.9, a naming of a public lane located west of Scarlet Road north of Leot Avenue. Um, just so you know that we'll be naming it Caspian Lane. And uh, I am happy to move those the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 31.1069 Whitom Hill Boulevard construction staging area. I would like to hold that in my name. EY 31.11 Maple Leaf Drive and Rustic Neighborhood Streets Plan. Councelor Nunziata. Well, if we can just hold it down to the end and then if I can just speak for two or three minutes because we have staff here and I don't have any deputation. So rather than have them sit here, I'll just speak for three minutes and then move my motions. So we'll go through you need three minutes and motions. Okay. We'll we'll hold it. Yeah. Yeah. BY 31.12. Uh it's the same it's the same thing. So we went those together. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. EY 31.13 a through highway Ellir Avenue that's with one L between the east side of Weston Road and easterly limit of Ellirre Avenue. Councelor Nunata yes I'll move the recommendation. Councelor Nunata moves staff recommendations. All those in favor any opposed? That carries EY 31.14 Canon Jackson Drive parking and traffic regulation amendments. Councelor Nunetta. Yes. I'll move the recommendation. Councelor Nunzi Adam moves with staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 31.15 Delta Street, Gamma Street, and Beta Street traffic calming. Uh we have speakers, so we'll hold that item. Ey 31.16 Shockley Drive, uh Mingle Haze Drive, Alabaster Road, Ghan Spring Drive, and Plowshare Crescent traffic calming speed humps. I will hold that for councelor Croissanti. EY 31.17 temporary traffic control signal and compulsory stop control on Highway 27, Royal Crest Road, Baywood Road, and Mars Road. I will hold that for councelor Croissanti. EY 31.18 on street electric vehicle charging stations on Kinsdale Boulevard and the Kingsway. Uh those are delegated locations. Um, councelor Moley, could you take charge of that? I'm happy to move staff recommendations on this item, Mr. Chair. Councelor Moley moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 31.19 on street electric vehicle charging stations on Lakeshore Boulevard West and Weston Road. These are non- delegated locations. Um, councelor Nunziata. Yeah, it's just move the recommendation. Councelor Nunata moves the recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. EY 31.20 Hackett Avenue, accessible parking space. Um, we'll hold that for councelor Peruta. Ey 31.21 Marquee Avenue parking amendments. Uh, councelor Moley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, on EY31.21, I would like to hold to amend the item. Um, so if I could hold that in my name. Sure. Thank you. EY 31.22 Kaledan Road parking amendments. We have a speaker. We'll hold that. Ey 31.20 uh I'm sorry. Uh there are two items of business to be added. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm out of sequence here. Too many pieces of paper. Ey 31.23 uh changes to business improvement areas boards of management. Um councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to move the staff recommendations on this. Council more than moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. EY 31.24. Um 1351 135A 137 139 Wendell Avenue designation of fire routes and amendment to chapter 880 fire routes. Uh councelor Nunetta. Yes. I'll move the staff recommendation. Councelor Nunetta moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Okay. So, that is the uh published order paper. Uh members, there are two items of business. 25. Uh no, it needs to be added. We're going to we're going to add 25. Uh so, the first item to be added is EY 3125 temporary signage permit for the Utopico Rotary Ribfest 2026 community event. I'm happy to move that that be added to the agenda. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh members, there is a registered speaker. I guess I'll check with the clerk. It's on my speaker paper, but we've added the item, so that will have to be held. Um the next item is EY31 and that will be number 26. Uh that is Royal York Road and Bluer Street West laneway service standards. Uh Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to add this uh to the agenda as new business. Councelor Mley moves to add this to the agenda as new business. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. So those are the 26 items. Okay. Trusting councelor Croissanti is on his way. Um, we're just going to move to the second item, 2 to4 Menota Road. Um, I expect that councelor Croissanti is on his way. Uh, so we'll go to that item first and then we'll come back to EY 31.1. So this item is EY 31.2 2 to4 Modota Road official plan and zoning bylaw amendment a decision report. Uh, there are registered speakers. Our first speaker is David Lee. Is David here in the chamber? Excellent. Welcome, David. Can you just give us a test hello into the speaker there? Make sure. Good morning. No, no sound. Uh, there's a little button on the front. Could you hit that? Give that a test. Good morning. Uh, much better. We can hear you loud and clear. Welcome to the York Community Council. You've got five minutes. Please begin. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. Good morning. My name is David. I live at 36 Menota with my wife and our young son. And you're going to hear my neighbors speak and they're going to accurately detail how public storage and their operators have impacted us for the worse. There are a lot of experiences talking about how us as a community have done our best to work with them, but they continue to deliberately ignore the rules, regulations, laws, and bylaws that give them the privilege to operate a business while giving us the right to live safely and peacefully in our own neighborhood. I like to emphasize safety and well-being. the rules, regulations, laws, and bylaws are in place to allow them to turn a profit, which I'm sure they're doing. And that's why they've moved motion to try to expand their operations, but also provide everybody else that shares the space a peaceful area to live in without worrying about well, set peace. I'm sure all my neighbors here today and all my neighbors following remotely would agree with me when I say that they shouldn't even maintain a license to operate a business with what we've witnessed and what you're going to see that has been detailed over many many years, let alone being granted permission to expand their operations. We're asking that you make the right decision. And the right decision is to deny them their requests to expand their operations. Because if you vote to do so, it would directly impact us and put us at even greater risk than what we've already seen. Thank you. Thank you. Before you go, Mr. Lee, just I need to ask, are there any questions of the speaker? Uh, councelor Moley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, thank you so much for joining us today and for sharing a little bit. I wondered if you could give us a little bit more um color context or sort of details on some of the violations that you've experienced living as a neighbor um to this site. I'll touch on that very briefly because Victoria has done a very wonderful job of detailing all these things, but just off the top of my head, they're operating outside of ours when they're supposed to. That creates a lot of havoc. Yeah. Uh, another thing that we've witnessed is people are living inside public storage. That's a scary thing. That's negligent and willfully negligent on their part. We've detailed this time and time again. We've reached out to them directly. We've reached out to the authorities. And before it gets to the point where somebody gets hurt, we want this addressed. And we feel like expanding their operations would only perpetuate something like this. I really appreciate that. Thanks, Stephen. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Steph Mati Viva from GHD group in the chamber or online. Uh, good morning. Welcome to the Utopbico York Community Council. Good morning. You've got five minutes. Um, sorry if I can just load my presentation. A second to get you connected and then we'll start. Thank you. Okay, we see your presentation. Please go ahead. Perfect. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of council, and members of the community. As for the public record, my name is Stephanie Metviva. I'm the registered agent with GHD Limited. So, I do have a brief presentation before you today. Uh, the site before us today is municipally known as 2 to four Menota Road. It's outlined on screen in the orange outline. It's located on the east side of Mandota Road, west side of Grand Avenue, and north of the Gardener Expressway. The image on screen just indicates and gives a visual representation of the surrounding area. So, I would just like to highlight that the site is surrounded by a range and mix not only of land uses but also built form. As further highlighted in the staff report, the area surrounding the site and including the site has evolved over a number of decades. It's currently transitioned from a more industrial commercial employment uh area to excuse me a vibrant mixeduse area that's before us today. Just to put some color context to this, this image on screen is a few images of not only representing the existing site conditions but the surrounding area. So the site is currently improved with a low-rise commercial self storage facility comprised of a one and twostory built form components. There is a number of drive up units. What I would like to highlight is that there is a change in elevation not only from the north to south property line but also from the east and west property line. Given this the site is a little bit lower than the surrounding area. This provides opportunities not only for the existing but also the proposed facility to there's opportunities to effectively mitigate the appearance of mass and scale. Now in terms of what's proposed before you today, it's for a commercial cell storage facility. It's a terrace built form. It would have a maximum height of four stories. As measured from established grade to the top of the building, the height is approximately 14.63. 63 rounded to 14.7 for ease. Um it is a terrace built form so there are stepbacks being provided above the second and third story elements along the east west and northern property lines. Additionally the proposed facility would have a gross floor area of approximately 11,155 square meters or just over 120,000 square ft. Internally, there would be a mix of self- storage units of varying size and configurations. Additionally, the site would have 31 surface parking spaces provided provided across two surface parking areas along the south and eastern property lines. There's also fairly generous setbacks provided from the east, west, and north property lines of the proposed uh surface parking areas. There would also be two accessible parking spaces provided. There would be four bicycle parking spaces included. And lastly, there would be three integrated loading spaces provided almost central where the building sort of juts out in the middle there. Now on screen are just some preliminary renderings. This visually indicates the terrace built form that is being contemplated. The terrace built form again provides opportunities to effectively mitigate the appearance of mass and scale. It is a refined built form and it will be further reviewed as the planning process proceeds. So just to highlight a few key features of the development again a terrace built form is contemplated. I realize this is techsavvy so I'm not going to go through all of it. Um but again great effort and care has been taken in the proposed development. We have listened to the concerns expressed from the community. In terms of the policy context, again, this is highlighted in the staff report very well. So, I don't want to be overly repetitive. The site is currently designated neighborhoods within the by the in effect Toronto Fisher plan. Neighborhood policies permit a range and mixture of built forms, but there is a maximum height of four stories. As such, the proposed development conforms to this maximum height limit. Density is not specified within the official plan. Density is to be controlled along with other site development uh standards within the implementing zoning bylaw. Now, in terms of zoning, the site is out is located outside of the citywide comprehensive zoning bylaw 569-203. It is currently subject and is proposed to remain subject to the Atobbico zoning code. The Atobbico zoning code currently zones it as class one industrial or I-C1. The applications before us today, I'll be brief, I promise. Can I ask you to wrap up? Yep. Um, so in terms of the applications before us today, we're seeking official plan amendment to introduce a new sighting area specific policy as well as a zoning bylaw amendment to massage and modify the existing zoning development. Thank you. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. There are questions. Um, please go ahead, councelor Moley. Thank you. Thanks for being with us today, Stephanie. Um, you uh and I appreciate the presentation. uh you mentioned that you have listened to some of the concerns of the local neighborhood. Can you um help me understand how those are reflected in either the proposal before us or any amendments or adjustments to the operations of the site? Absolutely. Thank you for the question through you Mr. Chair. So some of the adjustments that have been made have been the terrace built form. So I know we have the benefit of this site being subject to a previous development application as well as a presubmission community meeting. So during that community meeting, council morley, I recall that you were unable to attend, but we did take detailed notes. So some of the concerns expressed and what have translated into the current proposal before us, there are concerns expressed about the height, the density, the scale. So in terms of those considerations, the proposed terrace built form does provide a mechanism and a way of accommodating the concerns about massing and scale. So you're not having blank walls very close to the neighboring residential development. What about the concerns related to operating impacts to local residents? So in terms of that concern again, thank you for the question. Um so operating hours and operate the fundamental operation of the facility is unfortunately outside of official plan policy and the current applications before us. Having said this, I mean we've listened to this concern. It is something that will be taken into consideration as the process proceeds um in speaking with the owners. So the new facility if it were to be approved would have different access permissions granted. Essentially there would be keypad entry um that would only enable certain certain folks that are registered to be able to enter the building. So it addresses the public safety concerns. In terms of operating hours, there are bylaws that regulate that. again outside of zoning and official plan but is something that has been listened to and will be taken seriously. Uh thanks for that. The other um concern was with respect to the amount of additional traffic that's going to be coming down uh residential streets and impacting residential communities. Uh has any thinking gone into that with respect to the proposal before us? There has. So through you Mr. chair. As part of the application, a traffic impact study was prepare was prepared and is available on the city's website. The traffic impact study was prepared by a qualified transportation consultant. So, they did thoroughly study the surrounding road network. They also thoroughly studied the parking demand. The TIS has recommended that the the surrounding road network can accommodate the development. It's understood it is primarily residential surrounding it. although there is a mixeduse character a little bit further north along Queens way. Um but that the surrounding road network the access the way of access to the site has been thoroughly studied. The uh parking study or sorry the parking demand was found to be satisfactory for the user demands. Generally just based on the way that self storage facilities operate there is not a large parking demand. So it was found to be appropriate and additionally um effort was considered we heard this concern from the community as well as from staff through the technical uh review of the application. So there was an effort to see whether access could be accommodated off of Grand Avenue. There was adjust it was thoroughly reviewed ultimately for a number of reasons including public safety. um the gray differential that I mentioned, it was found to be infeasible. So, these concerns have been thoroughly considered and have taken we've taken them to heart. Uh the last quick question that I have for you, and you may not be able to answer this, appreciating you're here as an agent specific to the planning matters, but uh the concern that was raised by the deputent before you about people living inside the storage units, is that something that's permissible in this location? It's not. Again, it's outside of official plan and zoning bylaw amendment. It's understood that this can happen. Um, so when we are when the owner is aware of these circumstances, the appropriate procedures are followed, including making contact with Toronto police. Thank you. I'll leave it there, Mr. Chair. Uh, there are further questions. Um, councelor Nuni. Yeah. Um just on that question that uh council me asked so then you are aware that there are people living in the storage facility then through you Mr. Chair not me personally um we have heard those instances and the circumstances that it has occurred. So why haven't you taken action then through you um Mr. the actions have been taken. So again, when this occurrence is understood to be occurring, contact is made with Toronto Police. There are procedures in place. Um there's only so much that can be done within the within the binds of the law. But the people that are renting the storage, you know who they are. So if you find out that they're actually living in there, can't you just revoke their permit through you, Mr. Chair? I I mean because you they you have to apply for a permit and a license to be in there. Correct. It's a question for the owner. I know that you do have to make legal there's legal contracts um to make sure that you're abiding by the operating rules. So the existing storage has been there um for 40 years. Right. Correct. and and and what you want to do is well what your client wants to do is demolish the existing storage and replace it with larger and taller uh so so what's the reason for that is there uh a market for it is what's the reason for expanding it because it is in a residential area am I correct because I don't know the area but it's in a residential area so why would you want to expand it when there's an existing issue that you have there through you Mr. Chair. Uh so the reason for the application is to modernize the building, modernize the operation. Uh so the self- storage business has changed. The modern facility would better accommodate business needs but also user demands. So there are existing examples in the surrounding area where it's a little bit different of a service delivery model. There is existing facilities along uh the Queensway which is a little bit further north of this location. There is also another facility along Lake Sharp Boulevard West so a little bit southwest of this location. So in terms of the reason for the application, it really is to modernize it, make it meet better meet business demands, but also user demands in the changing climate. um with housing units the way that they are, there are times where storage is required or desired. Yeah. But most of the storage facilities I know that are being built, they're not built in residential areas. They're built in industrial areas where there's not an impact on the residents. So I agree because I have a number of storage facilities going up in my ward as well, but they're not in residential areas. or industrial areas or even on main streets through you Mr. Chair. Um that is true. I mean there's a number that are within employment areas or other areas of the city. Again I would highlight like yes it is within a residential area. This facility has existed for many many decades. So the frankly the area around it has evolved. That's not to say that we can't just completely ignore the surrounding contacts. That's not the case at all. Um, but there are, like I said, there are existing examples of where self- storage facilities have been integrated within a mixeduse or residential context, including that Lakeshore example that I mentioned. Thank you. Thank you. I have a couple of questions. Certainly. Can you tell me how many units are in the existing storage building? Approximately 131. 131. And are those all ground units or are there second stories? No, those are all ground units. And do they all have access directly to the open air or is there an internal hallway? There is internal hallway on some of those units. Primarily they are drive up units though. So they would be accessed from open air for lack of a better word. So So the vast majority of the 131 would be drive up units. Correct. How many drive up units are in the new proposal? There's approximately 30 I believe um they're primar they're oriented on the ground floor towards the southern property lines. So essentially lining either side of the um integrated loading area. The remainder would be internal with hallways. Okay. So so those are the 30 that people can show up to and open their garage door and in Correct. The rest would be controlled through the building. Correct. Okay. um washrooms in this building. I think I see one in the plans. Can you tell me about that? Who's that for? What's it required for? So, there are building code requirements depending on the tenure and the size of the building. So, the washroom facility would be could be utilized not only by staff. There is an accessory office component um provide that would be able to accommodate those that wish to rent the units. there's other um boxes and those kinds of things that can be sold. So, the the washroom would be utilized by on-site staff, but could also be utilized by users of the structure. Okay. And there's one one washroom currently. There is uh this is something that would be thoroughly reviewed if this application were to proceed to site plan approval. Um could you tell me a little bit more about the additional uses beyond storage? So it's primarily commercial cell storage. So again there's a range of self storage units that are to be provided. There is that accessory office component again which is really meant to control access who's able to enter into contracts to make use and utilize those self storage areas. Those are the only two uses. Okay. Employees. How many are on site currently? I believe there's five. So it' be similar. And um what's the planned operating hours of this? So it would be standard operating hours. Um that's a question for the owner again would be thoroughly reviewed. My understanding is it would essentially operate from about 8:00 a.m. to 1000 p.m. Access would be controlled again by a keypad feature. So those that do not have a keypad or a code would not be able to enter the building. Is that seven days a week? I'd have to take that back. Okay. Um, the last one, uh, I see on the on the diagrams some trucks and truck turning diagrams. I can't make out what they are. Are they 53 foot trailers or are you contemplating smaller vehicles? They could be smaller. We're currently contemplating smaller vehicles. So, it's really more box trucks, um, things that are utilized really for moving. It's not to say and as required we have to demonstrate a whole range of trucks can effectively and safely maneuver the site but that is the intention. It's the smaller trucks primarily. Okay. Um thank you. Those were all my questions. Any other further questions on this item? Seeing none, thank you for speaking to us. Thank you. Our next speaker is uh Deborah Wilson. Welcome, Deborah. You're Thank you. Good morning, everybody. I'm just going to read from my phone. My name is Debbie Wilson, and I've lived on Menota Road for 28 years. I believe I'm one of the OGs. Um, I've watched my community grow and prosper into an incredible, wonderful place to live. Within the last few years, public storage has basically hijacked our roads with countless cube vans and trucks racing down Menota Road, sometimes reaching speeds of 80 clicks per hour. This happens frequently. If this proposal goes through, that will be the least of our problems. Our property values will dramatically diminish. It will no longer be the community it is now. Our health and safety will also be dramatically affected. Interestingly enough, earlier councelor Morley spoke to the impact of our emergency services and having access to our roads. If this proposal goes through, that will be very difficult, almost impossible for emergency services to reach us, particularly in the winter months when there's buildup of snow. I am imploring this council to act with common sense and decency and to vote no to this expansion. Thank you. Thank you. Were there any questions of the speaker? Councelor Morley, please go ahead. Thanks for joining us, Debbie. I really do appreciate it and I know you've been a long-standing resident in the community. Um a similar question that I had asked um to David earlier just around some of those um specific issues that you have seen go unressed by the current um property owner and operator. Can you give us a little bit more um a few more examples of what you've complained about directly and seen not be addressed? Sure. So many times I have gone directly into the offices of public storage. I've spoken to them about the vagrant uh people that are residing in there. Again, I'm not going to speak too much to it. Um my neighbors have that information. We have stopped cars and trucks and cube vans basically going into the middle of the street to tell them to stop. There are countless dogs, pets, small children in the neighborhood freely wandering around. It has become a raceway. They don't care. That's the problem. I really appreciate that. Thanks, Debbie. Those are my questions, Mr. Chair. That's it. Okay. Any further questions? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Marshall Platt. Welcome to community council. You've got five. Thank you. Good morning. Morning chair and members of the committee. My name is Marshall Platt. My wife Tanya and I live at 36 Menota Road, Unit 3. I'm here today along with many of my neighbors to express strong opposition to the proposed resoning and expansion at 2 to 4 Menota Road. I submitted written comments last week and I asked that that submission along with this deputation be included in the public record. I addressed three main topics in my original submission but will focus on the transportation impact study in my five minutes today. Additional comments are obviously in the in the deputation. The study identified that the proposed expansion anticipates a 360% increase in traffic flow as a result of expanding the facility footprint by a similar percentage. This includes the addition of three typea loading docks accommodating heavy singleuse trucks. These increases and additions are significant by any measure. Yet the study concludes that these projected volumes will have a negligible effect on the overall network. And in my view that conclusion is flawed from many perspectives. The most significant anomaly firstly is where the study identifies concerns with intersection spacing and corner clearance within the related road network and specifically concerns at the Dalesford and Grand Avenue intersection. When the study assessed whether Grand Avenue, which is significantly wider than Menota Road, was feasible as an entrance point for the facility, they concluded that it was not feasible as a result of the intersection spacing and corner clearance concerns. Yet the study then ignores applying the same logic of concern to the smaller and narrower intersections of Dalesford and Wesley and Wesley and Mandota which ultimately would carry the load of the 360% increase in traffic along with the increased tra. And as a side note, Dalson, Wesley, and Wesley and Menoda are three-way intersections, and Dale and Grand Avenue is a four-way intersection, and that was that was deemed uh concerning. This is not considered or addressed anywhere in the study and seriously brings into question the validity of the conclusion reached in the study that the impact is negligible, a double standard, no doubt. There's also no mention of cons or consideration in the study of the dead-end nature of Mota forcing two-way trips and limiting maneuverability especially now that there's 11 1/2 m in length trucks being accommodated. They did a study to uh assess the internal maneuverability within the uh within the storage unit but did nothing to assess the maneuver maneuverability outside outside for those trucks. And if you looked at the diagrams and to see what it takes to move those trucks around, there's no ways trucks are moving around at the bottom of the dead end street if if they need to. There was also no consideration in the study of winter conditions where snow banks routinely reduce Menota, Wesley, and Dalesford into effectively single lane roads. Clearly, this will have an impact as usable road width width becomes compromised in these conditions, even more so for truck traffic. There's also no consideration in the study of the 27 on street parking spaces which are available to Menota Road residents and which further reduce usable roadwidth below safe standards for truck passage. There's no consideration of turning radi uh uh radi constraints at key neighborhood in se intersections and it does not sufficiently address under parking considerations and how this would impact the road network in the event it arises. So how would trucks deal with delays when forced to wait the size of the street and the dead-end nature creates not only a safety hazard in these circumstance but also impacts the enjoyment of property as a result of congestion. The only basis is finally the only basis that seems to have been provided as an expectation for reducing the volume increase anticipated is reliance on transport demand management measures recommended to encourage alternative alternative modes of transportation and reduce the number of single occupant vehicle trips generated by the proposed development. The logic of this and how it might apply to a storage uh facility to meaningfully impact a 360% increase in in traffic volume is quite honestly hard to fathom. So on this basis I urge the committee to reject the conclusion reached that the impact of increased traffic is negligible as clearly is not. It's it it will have a significant impact and reject the reasonzoning and expansion proposal accordingly. So, thank you for your time. Thank you. Are there any questions? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Thank you. Our next speaker is Chris Darcy. Welcome to the Utopbico York Community Council. You've got five minutes. Please begin. Thank you. Good morning, uh, Mr. Chairman and council members. Uh, my name is Chris Darcy. I live on Dalesford Road. Uh I'm not going to read the letter I submitted last week uh for time constraint uh reasons, but I'd like to illustrate a few key points. First, to put this in perspective, this battle between public storage expansion desires and the neighborhood has been going on for many years. This is not a new situation, nor is the traffic problem in our neighborhood new, with cars and trucks speeding down our streets to avoid Queensway gridlock and get to the storage facility. So even if there was no proposed expansion, we already have a bad traffic situation that hasn't been remedied by the city. And the expansion will only make the current unacceptable situation worse. Which begs the question, why would anyone approve an expansion which would only make a bad situation worse and agree to a plan that would increase the risk to residents, young and old, of being seriously injured or killed by a vehicle? This proposal flies directly in the face of Toronto's vision zero plan which is focused on reducing traffic related fatalities and serious injuries and prioritizing the safety of our most v vulnerable road users. To put it in stark terms, this will greatly increase the probability that children in the neighborhood may be critically injured or die while on their way to school or a playground by even more speeding cars or moving vans from outside the neighborhood or because emergency vehicles trying to assist someone in need will be blocked by those same vans and vehicles. But increased traffic safety and congestion is just the start. With all due respect, no reasonable, rational decision maker after reviewing our submissions and the facts would also ever agree to a proposal that represents inappropriate land use that doesn't conform to the critical the official plan that represents improper intensification of illegal non-conforming use. A proposal that is incompatible with the surrounding residential context of low-rise homes. A proposal that produces negative transportation impact and infrastructure constraints. a proposal that increases pollution, environmental damage, and related negative health impacts. The ridiculous, and I choose that word carefully, proposal to add three stories to the facility will turn this into a gargantuan orange and white four-story monolith, completely out of scale with the surrounding town homes. It will block out most of our sunlight, reduce the heat in our homes in winters and the enjoyment of our homes year round. And to the public storage representatives assertion that this is terrorist, my answer would be so are mountains and they still block out the sun. I've climbed a few. This expansion will ruin our surrounding surrounding views. The one nice view we have of downtown and the lake will be incredibly unpleasant to live beside or near. Due to the increased noise from the constant unwanted activity. The first time someone mentioned this unbelievable scale and magnitude of the expansion to me, I couldn't believe that any company that believed in corporate social responsibility would actually have the audacity to propose it. In the same vein vein, we cannot believe that any rational, reasonable, responsible city planner or council member who truly believes in supporting safe, livable neighborhoods would vote in favor of such an outrageously bad proposal, which is negative from every aspect and in every way. If you've read the material, listened to the facts, looked at the drawings, watched the videos, and reviewed the photos we've submitted, it should be obvious that there is no justifiable reason to vote in favor of it. you've listened to our valid if you have listened to our valid specific points about how there is no way there will only be a neg negligible increase in traffic as a result of the 3.7 times increase in floor space which Marshall alluded to about our streets inadequate intersection spacing corner clearances width especially on Mendoza and especially in the winter about the lack of space on our streets or the turning radiuses is required for trucks and vans and about how people living in some of the storage units and wandering around the neighborhood during day and the day and night trespassing and making residents feel unsafe in their own homes. Then again, with all due respect, there's no way anyone should vote in favor of this. It simply makes no sense because a 370% increase in storage capacity it is with a an increase it is a certainty that all these problems will get only get worse. Normally when a decision of this magnitude is before any governing body the pros and cons are weighed against each other. We've given you 17 or more I've lost track valid wellthoughtout reasons why this expansion should not take place. Yet none of us have actually ever heard anyone explain why this would be good or positive for the neighborhood or for its residents. The only party that would benefit is a $5 billion company called Public Storage. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Thank you. I'm sorry. No, no, hang on. Uh, Councelor Peruta, go ahead. This is uh Could you envision anything other than a storage and in in that on that spot or just nothing happened there at all? Could I envision it? No, I I don't know. Like what what what what do you see being able to go in there that would be acceptable to the community? More town homes. What? More more town homes. I mean, it's it's unpleasant for the folks on Mandota and those of us who live near where the trucks are going by and the increased traffic. It it's bad enough as it is. This would only make it worse. Can I envision we put up with it? I can't envision anything else. So, you said what? Town homes. Town homes. Like town houses. Town town houses. Yeah. How tall? because now they can go six stories, two, three, but but not the height of the fourstory building. If I look from my deck, which is already above ground, and I look over to where it's going to be, it will completely block out the sky. It's completely out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood. I wish I could take you all to my to my back deck and have you look that way. Yeah. So you you you envision fourstory town homes back here that that No, I just nothing. How about nothing? Or just leave it the way it is if it has to stay there? But why increase it by from one to four stories? These are commercial stories. I don't know. I'm asking you, right? I I I'm just I'm I'm just asking what what do you see potentially there that might be acceptable? So basically nothing. zero or town houses or or or or bungalows or I mean residential it's a residential neighborhood. All right. Thank you. Thank you, council. Thank you. Our next speaker is Andy Hicks. Is Andy here? Great. Welcome to community council. You've got five minutes. Thank you. I don't plan to say much. I'm the company representative. I'm here to answer operation questions if you'd like to. I think I can answer them a little better than in Stephanie. And just one clarification, one of the questions um that was asked was number of units that were in the facility. Currently, there's about 275 units, 280 units approximately, not 130. I believe about 130 are currently outside accessible drive up approximately. So you go right ahead and you can Oh, but before I start, actually one more thing, just one clarification. We do not permit anyone to live in our facilities. Period. We do not permit that to happen. If it does happen, if it does happen, we take action as quickly as we can and we ask people to we force people to move out. And yes, I mean it it does occasionally happen in the storage business. It does happen. It's it's a people rent it and uh they they can come and they can go and and as soon as we determine that someone is living in there, we take action. That's company policy. We always do it. So, it's very very clear. We do not Hang on. Hang on. I'll let you ask a question. Thank you. I'm going to ask u members of the public and members of the committee to maintain order in the room. I know this is difficult and I know this is really important to you, but it's important for us to have people answer the questions and be able to hear. Um, so if people are shouting out or debating the answer, we can't make sense of it all. So I'll just I get it, but just please help us maintain order. So we'll start uh with councelor Mley. You had questions and then councelor Peruta. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you for being with us. Andy, you are an important person for us, I think, to hear from today. So appreciate you taking the time. Um there are a couple of points that have come up from the deputants and if you've looked at some of the submissions that have come in on this item as well and been part of the public process, you'll know that the community has some significant concerns as well as I do with the expansion here. So I'll just ask you a couple of questions. Um the first one um to pull on the thread my colleague councelor Nunziata mentioned what's the rationale here for an expansion at this site? The facility is aging. It was built in 1980. It needs to be modernized. Well, it doesn't need to be modernized. It begs to be modernized. It's it's a it's a it's it's an old facility. It doesn't have a lot of the modern amenities that our customers now ask for. Um it's not as secure as a new facility would be. Doesn't have any of as many of the new modern sort of security features that we would have in a new facility. Um and it's it's underutilized in our opinion. we we can the market has changed and there's more demand for storage. So, we feel we need to expand it with the access sort of the um lack of accessibility outside of coming through a residential street uh and some of the concerns that we hear about the truck traffic and concerns related to the volume of traffic coming through a dead end what is ultimately a dead-end street and a residential street. Um can you speak to any um any response to that? like do you do you appreciate that there are concerns for the folks that are living abuing this dead end street for the existing volume of traffic and those impacts? Yeah, I absolutely understand the concern about traffic. It's it's a concern that I would probably share as well and and if I lived in a neighborhood like this um but the reality is that storage is one of the lowest traffic uses you can have in a commercial environment. It it is which is big which is why the part of the reasons why Toronto itself has eliminated parking from the bylaw as far as a minimum minimum required parking requirement. Right? You seek to ask us what when we make proposals how many parking spaces we need in a facility because the city has acknowledged that we do not require a lot of parking because it does not generate a lot of traffic. Um, as far as neighborhood traffic is concerned, all I can do is go back to the traffic engineer. I am not a traffic engineer. We hire professionals to do that. So, I I can't call into question the the engineers report. I'm not an engineer. But as far as, you know, the report showing that traffic is is exable for the neighborhood, then then I can't really comment on that. So, have you been down to the site? Yeah, I go there quite often. Yeah. Okay. Um, with respect to the concerns about um, inappropriate usage, people living inside the units, can you advise how many complaints or how many instances in the last year that you've had on this site of people living in their storage units? I I do not know that and I don't have that information. I I would have to talk to the front front desk staff, which I do not have I have not done, so I can't speak to that unfortunately. Okay. Um okay. Uh the last question I just wanted to confirm what is the protocol u when concerns come forward with respect to people living in their units? When people concerns come forward if neighbors complain to the to as we've heard from deputants here today they've taken the time to flag these complaints. What is the protocol? Well, before anybody would even come to us and make a complaint if we were to see somebody living in a unit and we would we watch for that. We watch for the signs of people that don't leave the site or or things like that. And um or that they're coming and going and leaving a vehicle there and and you know, we we we do watch for that before anybody even would ever complain of that. If if that happens or if somebody complains, we'd approach the tenant, tell them they can't do it, and if if they don't comply, we will evict them from the from the property effectively. How long typically does that process take to evict someone from a from a unit or property? It's usually about a 30-day process. I mean, we will certainly do our best to stop them from from being on the property, but we have to give them notice under agreements. They they obviously they can't be doing what they do as specifically states in our agreements. They're not allowed to live in our units. Um we will take action as quickly as the law will allow us to do it. Thank you. Those are my questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councelor Frera. And Mr. Chair, I have a question as well. Gotcha. I I think in part you covered my question because I have some storage um facilities in in my ward and um they're not great generators of traffic. Um um like what in in this particular uh place how much um how many trips a day would this facility generate? Again, I would have to look at the traffic report, the engineers report, what they what they calculate. I don't I haven't done the counts myself, but they're probably I think we probably have those in the reports. Um, but it it it some days you might not have any traffic, other days you might have more traffic. So, it's it varies, right? Um, I I probably don't really want to put a number on it because I can't give you the number right off the top of my head. and and typically in your experience uh uh trucks and size of trucks that come to these facilities I I haven't had any complaints and I have a couple that butt up residential neighborhoods as well uh just simply because of the way sort of the industrial lands were were married with residential neighborhoods historically. Um, I don't I don't typically get complaints of like 18 wheelers and big uh box trucks going to these things. They typically like the smaller uh type moving vans and things like that, but I I just wanted to know if it's any different here. No, this this facility is not set to accommodate like a 53 foot trailer. It's built primarily for about a 26 foot long box truck, which would be total length would be about 35 feet would be the maximum size truck we would typically see at this, which is a U-Haul, the biggest U-Haul you would see on the road. And and in terms of the storage units, what what's what's your biggest storage unit than your smallest storage unit? And what's the average in between? Yeah. The unit sizes range from 5x5 to I believe we have a 10 by30 in this particular space. 10 by 30 about 300 square feet. Yeah. Yeah. So that's then that's a typical self storage unit mix. And and how many 300 foot units do you have here? Um I would say there's not not a lot of 10x30s. There's probably more in the 10 x 20 to 10 x 25 range for the larger unit sizes. It's probably about 200 of those approximately in the in the new facility. Yeah. And and in some of the facilities that I have, you you've got you got like um uh you know those gates sort of electronically monitored gates with cameras and and so on. I I know that uh license plates are taken going in, numbers of people taken going in. You keep track of all those things uh and and as and as well as when those folks leave is are How are you going to secure this facility? How's that going to work? Well, this facility will, just to be clear, this facility right now does not have a gate on on the on the front of it. We do not have a gate showing on the on the uh entrance. Um, currently we do have a gate. Currently, we have a gate. The new facility does not show a gate. Um, we will control largely control the access through the building loading area, which is all going to be keypad control. The vast majority of the units in this building will be interior accessed units. Um, we will have some units that are accessed on the outside. As Stephanie had mentioned, I believe it's approximately 30, whereas right now the vast majority are effectively accessed from outside the building without any key card access. Once you get on the site, once you go through that gate, you roam free around the site. The new facility will be um, like I said, the vast majority of the of the units will be inside the building approximately. Okay. And so, so let's say let's say I leased one of these units from you for storage purposes. What assurances do I have that my my stuff is going to be secure on your site? We we provide alarm systems in the building. We will provide camera systems on the site. Uh there's never any guarantees, but we certainly do the best we can. We take take all the precautions. We have typically have live video monitoring on on our sites on our new sites. Um, and we we would have floor controlled access on the unit. So, if you're on the fourth floor, the elevator will only allow you to get to the fourth floor. It will not allow you to get to any of the other floors. So we limit the accessibility to to the space in in one of these modern facilities much more so than we do in in a and and in terms of your own personnel on site like from security to cleaners to people who just generally maintain the place like what would that look like in a typical day? Our staff walk the facility every day looking for anomalies. Um they do they do a a unit check every day making sure every unit has a lock on it. It's a requirement of our of our facilities that every unit has a lock on it whether it's vacant or not. Um so that's one of the checks they do. They they they clean the facility daily. Essentially they're they're staffed every day um from the hours of 9:30 in the morning till 6:00 p.m. Um weekend hours are slightly different but seven days a week. Um and and and yes, so that so there's staff on site. Two to three staff would staff this facility. Thank you, Councelor Nunzi. Yeah, just one last question about the access to the unit. Um so when they sign a lease for the unit are part of the lease, does it does it not have a condition on what the use is? uh the use of storing storing goods that are non-hazardous, but specifically it says you can't live in it. Um yeah, is that part of lease? I don't I can't I have I'd have to look and tell you for sure, but I'm pretty sure I'm pretty sure lease does have that in there. Yes, I'd have to check to confirm 100%. And if it's not, we can easily add it. It's not hard to do that. But but we certainly do not permit people live in the unit. It's specifically for storage. No, I understand. But I I'm just questioning if it was part of the lease agreement when I don't I don't know the answer. So they're aware of it. So you don't have to wait to get complaints that you know. Yeah. I I I think you'd have to you'd have to really stretch the imagination for somebody to that wants to lease the unit to say if it's being leased for storage that they can live in it, but they are not permitted to live in it. And I don't I do not know if the lease specifically states that. I'd have to look and see. Thank you. Yeah. Cessor Croissanti. Uh yes, thank you chair. And so I really don't want to belabor this but you know I just uh my question is around the whole concern and community's concern about people potentially living in these units or have been living in these units. I I'd like to understand your business model. So uh so someone comes in, they want to rent or lease a unit. How does that come together? What questions are asked? How are these individual vetted before they get approved to be able to take a unit? Well, they first they come to us with a need for storage clearly. Um, right. It it's a demandbased business. There's lots of reasons people need storage. Could be moving. They could be a small business that need that need the space. We we service usually there's 25 to 30% of our customer base are small business type tenants um that can't afford to rent a large space and and that's this is sort of gets them going in their business. um that there's people that people people have changes in their lives and that typically is what demands stories. No, no, Susan, let me interject for a second. You know, I I understand the reasons why people want to rent, but what So, I walk up to the counter uh and uh what happens? They give me an application. Uh they ask questions. Okay, reason for storage or whatever. So, you fill out this application. Is there some actual uh vetting that goes uh uh in in the process before you approve an individual uh or individuals to take one or two units for storage purposes? Well, background check, driver's license. We we we take a driver's license. We get ID. Uh we try to get credit card information if we can. Um we certainly take ID for every unit. That's a requirement. There has to be ID presented. Beyond that, we're not doing background checks. We're not doing credit checks or anything like that. It's we're not a residential we're not a residential tenency. We're not we're not doing those types of things, but but we we Yeah, we certainly give our staff the we give them the ability to make judgment calls when people are renting from them if they feel that there's potentially a safety issue or something like that. But it, you know, it's it's very hard when someone comes to the front counter to deny them service. Um, yeah. No, no, I understand. Roughly, what is the cost of a lease or rent for um a 300 square foot unit? Let's say that 10 300 square foot or three 10 by30 at this location will probably rent for in a range about $800 a month approximately for that size of unit. Okay. Maybe a little more. That's okay. So, it's yeah, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the, you know, concept of someone coming in, filling out an application, here's my driver's license, you know, here's a deposit, I'll take the 300 square foot, you know, 800 bucks a month is not uh a drop in the bucket. So, obviously, they they they have the means and ability to pay for that and then rather than storing uh uh some or maybe they do store, but decisions are made to move into the unit as well. Is is that what I've heard? Is that exactly what happens? I I don't know where they make the decision to move into the unit, and I would not suggest that they move into the unit, per se. Um, as we all know, there's there's people that are down and out and destitute, and people will do whatever they can do to find a shelter, right? So, I don't know what goes through somebody's mind when they decide that they want to live in a sight of storage unit, but it does happen occasionally, and all I can say is that we take action when when it does. So, Anyway, so it it it does happen, but you're going to take additional steps to ensure it doesn't happen. Uh moving forward, I gather given your application that's in front of us. We we will step up our enforcement. Absolutely. If at this location if if that's what it takes for this application. Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Don't go away, Mr. Hicks. I I'd like to ask some questions. I thank you for your patience. As you can see, we're very interested. Yeah. Um I I wanted to members of council have experience in dealing with things like encampments and they're hard. One of the things that I've learned is there's often um access to facilities that allow something like an encampment or you know the occupation of a storage unit to live in to continue. uh access to food, access to uh hygiene, showers, access to washrooms, and it's the last point I wanted to ask you about. I asked the consultant about washrooms. Can you tell me what's on the site now and what your vision is for the future and whether or not there are controls that would um not enable somebody to live there? We we right now what we have on the property is one public washroom. Um and it's accessible to the people when they get on the site to use. I don't know right now if the staff are locking that washroom down and asking the people to come and get a key to go and use it. We do do that on some sites and I and I'd have to ask the question. I don't know if they're doing that right now, but we can do that. um we give our staff the discretion to be able to do that. With respect to the new facility, there would be washrooms inside and I'd have to look at the plan, but I believe we have washrooms in the office and I believe we have washrooms in the facility as well. Um inside the loading area, in order to get into those areas, you would require keypad access to get into into the area. The office would only be open during office hours. Obviously, if there's a washroom inside the warehouse itself, then we would require you'd need to you'd have to get into the building, which would require a code access. We can take further measures, uh, which we have done in some cases where we've had issues where people would come and just use our washrooms where we put additional an additional code, a keypad on the washroom door itself. Um, we aren't envisioning that right now, but we certainly can do that to to secure it even further. That being said, if anybody rents a unit with us, they get a code and they have the ability to get into that washroom. So, but we can see who goes into that washroom at a certain time. And we can also control the hours at which the doors will open and close with that keypad. So, so I guess what I'm getting at, what I've heard, I think through the deputations is that it's one thing to have somebody show up, drop off their stuff or pick up their stuff and leave. Time there is short. They come and they go. If people linger or come at odd hours, uh they have purpose and opportunity to stay. Sometimes they stay and live there. Uh it is the facilities that support that activity that allows it to happen. So um I realize you can't promise anything, but I think I've heard from you that you would take a look at those circumstances. Absolutely. Absolutely. And just to be clear, our hours of operations in the building are from 6:00 a.m. or 5:30 a.m. until 1000 p.m. That's when people have access to the building. Um, we do not provide 24-hour access. There are rare occasions where that's been given, but we don't, as a policy, we don't do that anymore. Um, we shut it down at 10:00 if anybody is inside that building. And again, the outside units are a little bit different than the inside the building, but the inside of the building, there will be alarms that will be automatically setting at 10 p.m. or shortly thereafter. And if there's anybody in the building that wandering around, it will set off alarms that will in u response will ensue from that. So that's an important distinction. So if somebody was going to live there, they would have to live in one of the external facing units of which there are 30 I think approximately. Yeah. Either that or they get locked in after 10. Yeah. Okay. Um parking cars. Uh do you allow the storage of things outside the building? There is space at this property and we have in the past. I'm not sure if we are right now, but we have allowed vehicle storage at sites in the p at this site in the past. Um, this new facility will not we will not be permitting any outside storage at all. So, the 30 or so parking spaces are for people that are coming strictly for parking. All right. So, nobody's going to live in a camper or a car. And just to be clear that those 30 spaces are probably far more than we need to operate this business. Understood. Yeah. Um, in terms of regulation for hours of operation, can you tell me what laws govern that? I mean, I can ask the staff that, but you said that you're 5:30 a.m. to 10 p.m., but that's that's your choice. Do you have regulatory restrictions on when you operate? Not to my knowledge. No. Okay. Thank you very much for answering my questions. Yeah, that's it. That's it. Unless somebody else has more. No, thank you for joining us. Um, our next speaker is Darlene Barnes. Is Darlene here or online? Great. Welcome to the Utopbico York Community Council. You have five minutes. Thank you. I'm Darling Barnes and I live at 85 Wesley and I have lived in the area for 29 years. So I was currently there before um when when there was a scaffolding place and a wig factory that was there and they were all of course one story. And I do have concerns about the amount of traffic that I see coming along Wesley and along Dalesford. Um, I have also been um there homeless people have been a real issue in our neighborhood and I have watched a homeless man sit for at least three weeks at Daleford and Mandota on the boulevard there watching as everybody left and came came and left their homes. And eventually I had my nephew go over and speak to him and threaten him that if he didn't leave then we were going to be having the police come and deal with him. But the police have not been very helpful at all with regards to the homeless people and it continues to be an issue. um trucks. There are huge trucks in spite of what the previous speakers have said that do go along um Wesley men and Mandota. Um and they go at a speed that is unconscionable and and as I've said over the years there it is now a residential area and there are lots of children. We have a parkquet that's there and I I I'm very concerned about the increase in this storage. There is a storage, a public storage on the other side of the highway that is in a commercially zoned area next to Costco and I I'm not sure why they're not expanding that storage to the four stories that they want. That's my Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Thank you. Our next speaker is Mahib Burke. Welcome to community council. You've got five minutes. Good morning everyone and thank you for your time. Could you just tilt that a little closer? Good morning everyone. Sounds better. Much better. Thank you. Okay. Um I have lived on Menota Road for um over 15 years and this is a very close-knit community. Uh Menota Road is a dead-end street. Um my colleagues who are going to speak uh the other residents are going to provide photos of how um about the traffic. We have talked a lot about traffic. Now my major concern of what I'm going to talk about is um the solutions and the answers that have been given by um public storage. So public storage is a um it is a gated facility and they are responsible for everything and they have provided reasons and their progress and whatever they're going to do inside uh the public storage. Now the concern is outside the public storage. what happens is our responsibility and they the response every time we get from them is uh they have no control over um what happens outside. So in regards to traffic if there is a resident who is speeding we have approached that resident and expressed the concern reminded them that the speed limit is 30. Um but a a person who is speeding from who back and forth from public storage who is going to stop them? We are not. They're not going to listen. We are asking for disputes. We are asking for fights. We are asking for road rages. In regards to people living in the facility, the answer given was that um we notify the police. Now that is just an answer and that's an empty answer because police is not going to do anything. It's a private facility and the police will not enter um any of the public stoages uh without a search warrant in order to obtain a search warrant. There is um a lot of information required. Um there is surveillance required and I am very sure and I'm sure many in this room will agree that we do not have the police does not have the resources to um do surveillance on one of the units of the public the public storage um just to see if somebody's living there. We have had many issues of people living in the public storage. Um I have had a female at the back of my house um who was approached who was confronted for living in the public storage. Now I do not find that safe. I had two young girls living in my house at the time. Um I had to get a camera. The camera is not going to protect me, but it may show it has gathered the evidence that the female was in my uh back backyard. Um we when the storage uh employee was approached in regards to uh people living there um they said that they are f they have five employees. Um I live very close to the public storage and I have never seen five employees there. I see one man um or a woman sitting in the front office. When the question was raised that the people are living there um his answer was he does not have a window and he cannot see. That's not a suitable answer. We we we are not we are not going to make a window for them for him to see. Most of the answers that are given and excuses that are given is that they're going to have keypad access. I am not very sure of all the problems and issues that have been raised by the residents how much one keypad is going to protect us. Um in clear words, it's definitely not going to protect us. There is a keypad right now. Um they have um notified about the timings of whatever their morning timings are. Those are the timings for an employee to be there at the office. Those are not the timings for people to access it. People have access through the keypad 24 hours a day. Most of the businesses uh most of the trucks that come into the facility are uh the food trucks. Um that is a very um one of the most lucrative business that public storage has. So when a food truck has worked all day um and they come to park their food truck at the storage facility, it is washed and cleaned there. Uh the person who has been operating in the food truck all day is tired and um yeah he would like to listen to some music at that time. So the music is on but we don't want that music. We are sleeping at that time. Um in regards to the alarm system uh they have uh advised that there'll be alarm system. Now who's going to hear that alarm system? Can I get you to wrap up please? Okay. Um it is going to be us. Basically our life is going to be living hell if this public storage is um expanded. Thank you. Thank you. Are there questions of the speaker? If I had two questions. Yes. Could you give me a sense of where you live in relation to the site? Um, I live about four or five houses down. Uh, close enough that the public storage gate every time it is opened. The beeping sound annoys me. So, you're you're on the the Menota Gala side. I am on Menota. on Menota. Can you give me an idea? And maybe you don't know, but which way do the trucks I'm assuming they come from the Queensway? Like most of the traffic and the people that visit the site, how do they get there? Do they go down Wesley Street or do they go down Grand and cut back across uh Dellsford? Like what's the pattern? There are about five or six streets um that all of them from the Queensway they will lead to Menota Road. What's the main one though? There's no main. There's no main. That is one of the concerns because most of the streets do not have um sidewalks. So when these trucks are turning from there, the the problem starts right when the truck is turning. Do they use um Grand Avenue? They do use Grand Avenue. Yes. Okay. And I'm sorry I I have to ask this. The only person the communities are the only people that know, you know, how the trucks move. Okay. Um thank you for answering my question. Thank you. There's no access. There's no access from Grand Avenue, right? But they would turn down uh Dalesford. So they may turn from Grand Avenue to Dales Ford and then turn to Menota Road. Okay. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Um our next speaker is uh Jose Luis Flores. Welcome. You've got five. Thank you. Thank you very much. Good morning councelor. Good morning Amber. Good morning. Uh Miss Mrs. Niata Mr. Perusa. Yeah, a lot of details have been discussed already. I I live in 18 Gal Lane about 30 meters from this facility. I do not oppose to uh public storage facility. I opposed to to its location. It's been discussed there is clearly uh Mandota Road is is too thin for to support a facility like this that is going to increase just by common sense four times the traffic. um in critical situations. I don't think these sort of companies have control over what what substances could be storage there. We have you seen in the press two days ago there was a a a fire on a on a condo building in Missaga due to lithium batteries. What is going to happen if one day is a critical u fire in that facility that is going to be much larger even if they have sophisticated system and controls that eventually through time go weaker for xyz reasons. Um, so I sincerely ask uh the council to consider this this expansion that has not is not compatible to with our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Victoria Newman. Laptop because I have a presentation. It's on this side. I also have and I can share with the member or whoever this is permissions misleading information. All the information is there. You can read that at your convenience. Uh so welcome. You've got five. Thank you. Thank you. I will try and whip through this because I do have a lot of pages, but I really want to get to photo and video evidence. This is This is evidence of illegal dumping on our street. So, this is a camper that wanted to p park in public storage, but his camper was full of waste. What he decided to do was find the city drain on the street and dump it all into the city drain before I've got a video following this with him going into public storage. before he went into public storage. Ammonia, it stank. I was walking my dogs. They started coughing and throwing up. The city had to send an inspector. The guy said, "Yes, there's illegal substances in there." The city had to send a pump truck and pump out all their drinks. That's one. This is a family that left a public storage unit and decided to have an impromptu garbage uh garage sale on the boulevard. Those things were left behind. a trailer tried to change the tires on their vehicle. They changed the tires on their vehicle, left public storage and just left that on the boulevard. Again, the city has called. They come to pick it up. This is the person my neighbor was just talking about where a pedestrian person living in the facility. She was there for about two months. Just walks up to the keypad during the day, punches it in, walks through, past the office, past the cameras, past management. This is a day picture. I have night video evidence and night pictures in and out. She did have friends with her. Sometimes they would bring Starbucks and they would leave the facility. There's some of the other neighbors. That's move in day. That's nap time. This guy here is the uh person my neighbor was talking about. He pitch up his lawn chair um inject narcotics, nod off and stay there. Then the boulevard becomes a bathroom. I can't tell you how many times I've been walking my dogs at night when I have to stop because somebody's using the boulevard as a bathroom and uh it's quite embarrassing frankly. City has called. It's a biohazard. So the city is called, the city comes in and cleans it up. Here's the turning ratio um that you need for these trucks. Ignored in the traffic study I showed to you. None of our streets have that turning ratio here. I think somebody said we don't have big trucks going down down down our street. I beg to differ. This was last week. This guy came through all our tiny residential streets and a massive transport truck. Decided they couldn't get into public storage. Had to call that white truck with two people in it for people to stand in front of the truck and behind the truck. Back him out entire through the entire neighborhood going over the boulevard, going over sidewalks. then went up to the Queensway to get out. You can't get out of the Queen's way with a truck like that. So, those folks went on to the side on either side of the Queensway, stopped all four lanes of traffic for this truck to get back out and get back onto the Queen's Way. So, you know, that was a a good effort on their part, but not practical. In this circle right here, this is the facility. Those are three transport trucks sized raised platforms for transport trucks. That was a transport truck that tried to go into our community. It's not mom and pops putting their summer furniture in the unit and a U-Haul they rented for the day. This is the size of the building. What's misleading about this for me is this is a sort of west southwest looking northeast. You see those little houses there under the word drive? Those are two sto those are singlestory bungalows. the whole stretch of dil over to Grant. They are going to be dwarfed by those buildings. No sun in the winter, goodbye backyard gardens, no peace. I mean, you might as well put them beside a giant industrial storage facility at the airport. That's what their life is going to look like after that. Here's our street in the winter. Shout out to my neighbors getting out every time it snows because we need at least one lane of traffic to get out. The second slide is right outside of my house. I'm on Menota Road. The delivery guy had to stop and run and do a bunch of deliveries. The red truck behind him, truck stops both ways. If that were an emergency vehicle trying to get to the end of our street with somebody having a heart attack or a child choking, you're delayed. It could cost somebody their life. The winter, that's one of the transport trucks that are parking there right now. He does not bring a trailer, but that was hydro one that had to go up onto the boulevard to get around him. And they were mirror to mirror trying to get beside each other. It's pretty insane what goes on today. These goes into major concerns we have. Those are pre-existing conditions. I can talk more to them and I have many more slides, many more. Sorry, there's 10 seconds left in your There's where we are right now. You're bringing more pollution right to our door by increasing traffic. 850 meters away. Two to four Mandota Road is where we are. 850 meters away. Less than a block away is a public storage facility right beside Costco. Entirely commercial. No kids riding their bikes, no schools, no parks, no playgrounds, no people going for a walk after dinner. Can I get you to wrap up just because you're over time? I'm Well, okay. That's how far it is. Now, there's deeper dive. Happy to forward this to everybody. It's very informative. I think that pictures are worth a thousand words and so are videos and I have plenty more I can share. Thank you. Are there questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Just to let you know, we have this. The clerk will scan it and put it into our records. I'll return that to the clerk. Our next speaker is Jen Moy. Hi, I'm Jen Moy. Thanks so much for having me. My family lives on Gala Lane. I have a 5-year-old and a seven-year-old. We've lived there for over 12 years. And I'm sure that most of you have visited the site and you just have to go there to know that several neardeath experiences with my son and my daughter riding their bike. There's a stop sign, a three-way stop. Actually, it's a one-way stop at a three-way intersection. And those cars, they don't realize it's residential with young kids. They don't care. They're going 80 down the down the road. They skip the stop sign. My child is going straight because he doesn't have a stop. And I can't tell you how many times they almost got hit. It's awful. And so I asked that we do not. And where are they going? I look public storage just zooming straight down Mandota. I've honestly I'm so scared for our kids in the neighborhood. We have got so many young kids and if this were to expand and you guys say yes to this honestly there's an accountability there if anything happens. Okay. Um we've been fighting this for over eight years. Eight years. Eight years ago, they went, we had a public uh meeting at the school, the local school. Over 100 people showed up right away. It was next. It was obvious it did not belong in the area and no one wanted it there. This fight continues to happen. The community is tired that it keeps on resurfacing. So, we ask you to put an end to it, please. We want to fight this monstrosity. It's zoned in a residential area and um we can't have it there. Um I also want to say that in the winter Victoria highlighted this nicely, but I have called the city about six times on plowing Mandota. It is a narrow one-way street in the winter. So that's well this winter was basically six months of the year. You can't get by. If there is an emergency, someone will die. And then adding public storage traffic and those big trucks, we already have a problem today. And this really can't get any worse. So I please, please ask that you reject this on the behalf of the community. you know, the people vote you in and I and I hope that you I deplore you guys to please uh vote against this. Thank you. Thank you. Are there uh any questions for the speaker? Seeing none, um that was the last speaker on my list. I'll ask if there's anyone else to speak to this item. Seeing none, questions of staff. Uh, councelor Moley, councelor Peruta second. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, through you to staff. Um, and thank you to our colleagues in planning. Um, good morning, Nicholas. The existing self- storage facility at this location is a legally non-conforming use. Is that correct? Uh, through the chair. Uh, no. It is a legal use. Currently, uh, the zoning bylaw does permit self storage, so it would not be considered to be legal nonconforming. It is a legal use. Okay. Um, is a self- storage facility a use generally permitted within a neighborhood area uh through the chair. Uh, in terms of uh the official plan, uh, as as we've heard today, this site is designated neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are primarily uh intended for residential use, but they can also accommodate smallcale service uses and other nonresidential uses. Is there a way for vehicles to access this site without driving through local streets in this neighborhood area through the chair, the site is accessed off of Menota Road. Uh as uh I think was mentioned earlier, uh we uh community planning staff uh did hear concerns that were raised at the community consultation meeting uh regarding uh vehicular access through the neighborhood uh and uh looking at the possibility of access to the site uh from Grand Avenue, which is to the east of the site. Uh as a result, we did uh ask the applicant to go back and have their consultant assess whether it was a possibility of uh access to the site being from Grand Avenue. Uh their conclusion uh was that there are very significant grade uh challenges. There's a overpass uh over the gardener. Uh so it's very difficult at the the frontage that the site has along Grand Avenue. uh because of that very significant grade difference from the site and uh and Grand Avenue uh and also the proximity to the intersection with Dalesford Road. So uh the it was assessed that the access uh was not feasible from Grand Avenue and would be maintained from Menota. So there is no way for vehicles to access this site without driving through the local streets in the residential neighborhood. Correct. It's correct. Yeah, that's correct. Thank you. This application proposes roughly a fourfold increase in the size of the facility. Is that correct? Uh currently the uh facility is uh just over 3,000 square meters uh in size and the proposal is uh just over 11,000 m. So, uh it's not quite four times as far as my math, but uh somewhere between three and four approximately. Thank you. Um the proposal includes three typea loading spaces. Uh what is a type A loading space and what type of vehicles is it designated to accommodate through the chair? Um, a type A loading space is uh generally a type A load a type a loading space that is designed to accommodate uh tractor semi-trail. So a uh a 53 ft trailer or a WB20 as uh we call that in in the transportation field as a design vehicle. Thank you Luigi. I appreciate that. Um and is there a way for vehicles to access Sorry, I already asked one. Uh, is this sidewalk network in this neighborhood complete or are there streets with no sidewalks and streets with sidewalks only on one side through the chair? Um, I I would I would guess that I haven't done an analysis of that or or an inventory of that, but I do know that there are some streets in this area that either have one a sidewalk only on one side or no sidewalks at all. Is that taken into consideration when the traffic analysis is done in terms of pedestrian impacts? um through the chair. We we do consider pedestrian impacts um in terms of how the traffic for a development will impact that. Um but we have to weigh that against the amount of traffic that is that the development will be generating. But the short answer to your question is yes, we do consider pedestrian impacts and the and the uh availability or lack thereof of sidewalks as well. Through the chair, that is correct. We try and secure upgraded sidewalks or uh sidewalks where there are no sidewalks through the development application process in general. And there's also a junior school in this neighborhood on one of the main access streets. Is that correct? The answer is yes. We'll go to the next one. There is one. Okay. Um there is a park with children's playground not far from the site at the corner of Dalesford and Wesley Road as well. Did staff assess um that as part of the impact of this proposed expansion through the chair? Um when we review a traffic impact study, before that study is done, we generally work with the trans transportation consultant to define a study area for that study. Um and it's a bit of a iterative process. Um uh and then we we determine which intersections or which streets are to be included in that study area. So if this playground is outside of that study area, then it may not have been taken into account. We're going to go to a second round. My time's up, but thank you for that. Professor Prussa. a couple of questions. U I I I imagine it's u it's more for u planning than uh so the so so mention has been made of the building height and shadowing. So I see here established grade zero I guess the the the the top of the building is 15.24 meters like that's what 50 more around 50 feet or so. um four stories that that that's um that's a little less than what that's about 13 13 foot a story, right? Is there any reason why the the the individual stories have to be so tall here? Is that just an applicant's desire because to get more storage in it or uh through the chair? Uh yes. uh community planning staff uh didn't have any specific requirements for this uh type of use in terms of the uh height of each of the individual uh stories. So you wouldn't typically comment on that. So if I came in with a story 20t tall, you'd say okay uh through the chair uh if we had uh yeah a situation that was uh you know different from this um you know I can't comment on that specifically. uh you know we we look at both the metered height of a building uh and and uh as well as the storied height when we are assessing impacts both of those factors really contribute to um the shadow and and other so in your opinion the 15.24 meters here is fits within sort of your planning guidelines and that's you're okay with that? Uh yes. So through the chair uh uh within the uh neighborhoods uh designated area in the official plan uh it speaks to a maximum heights uh of four stories. So uh the metered height but so number one we have a four-story building which which does comply with that uh land use designation. And then the second piece being in terms of the height, we've assessed uh whether or not that's appropriate based on uh the the um shadow impacts combined as well with the uh step backs that are provided in terms of shaping the massing. The the height of the story. So this is this would be what a typically like uh sort of concrete you know steel and concrete structure. Is that is that the way uh this is built? And I guess the infrastructure goes in the ceilings. So there would be drop ceilings here, correct or no? Uh through the chair. I'm not familiar with all of the uh individual architectural uh materials and design elements in the interior of the building, but uh I think that's uh common. Would they be required to have a mention was made of a potential fire in the future and it could be concerned. Are these buildings typically required now under the the the new rules to have sprinkler systems installed or or is this type of building exempt from that? Uh so through the chair uh these are building code requirements as we get past uh if this application were to be approved you would have site plan review and and subsequent to that a building permit application. I I think we may have building staff that could comment on that. But but you don't know now if if for example this building would be subject to um you know some kind of a fire retardant sprinkler system. Yeah. Yeah. Through the chair. Um we I don't think we have a formal application yet for building permit, but uh I anticipate that the requirement will be that it will be sprinkled. Okay. And and and do these do these because I don't know how they're built, right? Are they like are are they like, you know, concrete floors? Are they like metal floors? Does the infrastructure goes go under the ceiling? you know, your your conduit, your lighting, your plumbing, your all the your heating, if any. Um, where where does that go typically? Like I'm trying to understand the the the floor height here because the floor height seems 12 13 feet seems somewhat excessive to me. Um, but I'm trying to understand it, right? Yeah. through the chair. Um really really the floor height could could be uh it could vary just based on uh design features uh not necessarily a a requirement to be that tall. Okay. And there was one other question I had related to something else. But now that you guys got me to focus on this too intensely, so I forgot my other question, but as it comes to me, I'll ask second round. Don't worry. Yeah. Councelor Nanziata, just question for traffic and transportation. So um I mean we're hearing from deputants that there's a lot of traffic coming and going every day. I mean it's my understanding for a storage facility once you store your whatever you want to store you store it it's not that you have to keep coming back day every day um so when you assess the uh how much traffic is generated is it not the use like because the storage facilities normally should be that you store your your whatever you have and then you don't go back every day so I don't understand the amount of traffic that's going through the chair uh councelor. So, so in this particular case because we are dealing with an existing use, they're just expanding the use. What was done in terms of estimating how much traffic will be generated by the proposal? Um they did existing traffic counts of the existing site and then they projected what the increase would be based on the expansion. And uh I I I tend to agree with you in the sense that generally speaking, storage facilities do not generate a lot of traffic. And um you know maybe when you look at it from a percentage terms or percentage uh basis maybe the increase is a lot but you have to weigh that against the volumes that are currently being generated right now which are extremely low. Um so maybe from a percentage basis uh the percentage increase would seem like a significant amount. Uh but but you know in terms of the existing site the volumes are very low. Just to give you a general sense, uh the the existing site is generating less than 10 vehicles during the peak hours and that includes a morning, an afternoon peak hour and a Saturday peak hour. Hang on a second, Luigi. Um I'm going to just pause your time. I'm sorry we have to keep order in the chamber. I appreciate how important this is as I said and folks have made their presentation, but we have to be able to hear from staff during the question period. So we can't have a rebuttal. So, thank you for that. Please continue. So, you're saying that your study shows 10 vehicles a day. It wasn't our study. It was a study that was done by the transportation consultant. We reviewed it and and critiqued it, if you will, and provided comments on it. We did not do the study ourselves. Okay. Well, I'm surprised because what I'm hearing is that there's cars coming and going. Um, but looking at the picture, and I can't remember which picture it was, these tractor trailers are parked in the parking lot. So, are they using that as a parking lot and allowing other vehicles to park in the parking lot? It can't be from the storage. Do we know or anybody knows? No, but you can't answer through the chair. I I'm not sure if that type of activity is currently happening right now. And and if it is, I'm not even sure what the magnitude would be because according to the pictures, you see all these tractor trailers parked in the parking lot. So, I mean, that's not part of storage. It shouldn't be part of storage. Correct. It shouldn't. It's just parking activity. Yeah. But so, whoever is running it now is allowing that to happen. That would appear to be through the chair. That would appear to be an enforcement issue by the property owner or the business if that's uh shouldn't be happening. Thank you. Are other members with questions? I think councelor Croissanti, did you have questions? Uh, yes. Thank you. I need We'll go to a second round just so everyone knows. Go ahead. Um, so, um, this, uh, self storage, I think I heard earlier that it's it's, uh, allowed, um, as of right, uh, in this, uh, neighborhood area. uh through the chair the per uh the existing uh self- storage and then proposed uh expansion of this self- storage use uh is permitted as of right under the current zoning. So that would be uh the atobbico zoning code and specifically the industrial class one zone is this zoned what what is the zone currently right now? What is the zoning for this specific area that we're talking about now? through through the chair. This uh subject site is zoned under the atobico zoning code as industrial class one. Uh and specifically there is a sightsp specific bylaw 1979-121. So it's industrial not neighborhoods through the chair. Yes. the zoning. And to be clear, the zoning, not the land use designation under the official plan, but the zoning on the site is industrial class one. Industrial class one and that allows for So the industrial class one zone permits a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. uh the uh sightsp specific bylaw which was put in place uh under the atobico zoning code which is that 1979-121 bylaw uh further restricts the number of uses to uh certain manufacturing uses uh as well as self storage and an accessory residential for uh and someone who works on the site. So uh so what came first the self storage that's currently there or the residential area that is uh located immediately next door uh through the chair uh this uh self storage facility was constructed a little over 40 years ago. Um at the time uh it was part of a uh large uh band of uh industrial and commercial uh uses that were fronting the gardener expressway uh fronting uh much of uh this uh this area. So uh the specifically the uh residential developments which are the townhouse developments to the west of 2 to four Mandota were uh developed later than uh the self storage building. How long is this application for uh additional growth for the storage to u to add additional three stories on top? I believe when did this application come in? How long has it been on the books? Uh through the chair. Uh the subject uh application that we're uh discussing today uh was received uh in I believe late 2024 uh and was deemed complete early 2025. There was, as you may have heard, reference to a previous application um from the uh from the owner on the subject site to expand the self- storage use. That was a separate application that was received in 2017 and was withdrawn voluntarily by the applicant in 2019. How many total units are there currently uh and on the site storage units? Uh through the chair uh I I don't have the uh exact number uh right now. I believe uh the uh the owner was uh here earlier and spoke to a number around 20 230 or thereabouts. 230 currently and how many more um what would the total be if this gets approved uh if and goes ahead? Uh so through the chair uh apologies again I don't have the exact number but I I believe it is just a little over 800 storage units. So we be going approximately and as you said you don't know the exact but roughly from 200 to 800 units. Wouldn't that just naturally drive more uh traffic? And we we we all I think all agree storage units typically won't drive a whole lot of traffic in an area. Uh but they do drive traffic and whatever the current traffic volume is now potentially could be four four times what it currently is uh if this goes ahead to 800 units. Uh so through the chair I'll uh I'll defer to my transportation colleague. through the chair. Um so, so counselor, given the existing uses that are permitted on the site right now, there's a whole range of them. Depending on what those uses are, um if a proposal is put forward to have um let's say for example, a general light industrial use, which as far as I understand is a permitted use right now on the site, and we have the same development scale that that's proposed for the self- storage facility. uh it would generate roughly well I wouldn't say roughly more than double the amount of traffic that is going to be generated or is expected to be generated by the expanded storage facility. Um an R&D office uh research and development office as far as I understand is a permitted use on the site right now. uh that will expect it's expected that that site uh or that use would generate three times the amount of traffic that a self- storage facility would generate given the exact same development scale. Those are rough numbers in terms of providing some perspective. Okay, thank you. Time. Okay, my turn and then we'll go to a second round. Uh first question to uh transportation planning. um what is the current volume of vehicles on the adjacent streets? I give a couple of examples, right? It could be Dellsford, um Wesley Street, Grand Avenue. Do we have a sense through the chair? Uh 24-hour volumes. Is that what busy is the street on any given day? So, so if we go at Mandota uh near the site between Gala Lane and Wesley Street, uh the um 20 there were traffic surveys that were done by the city in November of 2025. The 24-hour average volume is around 450 vehicles uh per day. There was based on a three-day survey. And what about Wesley and and uh Daleford? Okay, so we do have survey data for Wesley near Daleford or south of Daleford. Yep. Uh unfortunately, that data is dated. It's 2014 data. So, uh, we we have to keep that in the back of our minds, but the average 24-hour, uh, volume is around 400 vehicles a day. Okay. And so, what is the delta, the net new traffic as a result of the proposal? Can we just go back over that? Just give me a sense against the background. Okay. through so through the chair the existing site uh based on the transportation consultants study is generating during the respective peak hours uh and by that I mean sometime a 1 hour period in the morning yep from 7:00 to 9 and 1 hour period in the afternoon from 4 to 6 and then a midday peak period uh it's generating less than 10 vehicles a day or during those peak periods I should say 10 vehicles per hour per hour that's that's what the site today is generating correct and that's distributed over the entire hour not all at once So in those numbers of 400 to 500 cars a day on those other streets that would include traffic generated by the site at a rate of on the peak hours around 10 vehicles per hour through the chair. That is correct. So whatever that is a couple hundred vehicles a day. Yeah. So with the proposed expansion Yes. with the proposed expansion uh the projected increases will be roughly 25 vehicles over and above what's being generated right now per hour per day. Per hour. Per hour. Per hour. Per hour. Yeah. Okay. These are all all these volumes are all peak hour periods. Understood. Thank you. That's helpful. Uh to planning staff, why why is this in front of us? I just I want to understand what they're seeking in the application that they don't have today. I saw something here about there's no height limit. What why is this here? Like you just walk me through it. It's planning nuance. Yeah. So through through the chair uh the the site as I've mentioned is zoned industrial class one under the atobico zoning code and the the use that's currently on the site and and expanded would be allowed self storage. However the existing uh sight specific zoning bylaw restricts the size of a facility a self- storage facility to I believe it's just around 3,500 square meters. So the proposed facility exceeds that size. So that's the first part. The second part is related to uh the comp uh the official plan conformity. So uh as was also mentioned the the site is located within uh a neighborhood's designated area. So the proposal uh to bring it into conformity with the official plan would be to have what's called a site and area specific policy which would uh permit uh the uh expanded self storage use and uh as the only additional permitted use within within the neighborhood. Sorry, was that last piece the additional permitted use? Yeah. So, uh it's through the chair. So, currently the uh neighborhood's land use designation uh doesn't specifically permit self- storage uses. It does permit uh certain smallcale uh other non-residential uses. But in order to to make that clear, uh there's this official plan amendment. Um yes. Thank you. And my last one, what can the city regulate through the site plan process? And I'll be very specific. There's some discussion around tractor trailers, loading ramps, the space on the loading ramp, parking of vehicles, uh, overnight as a storage feature, you know, all of those nuisance things that the community has brought up. Can you regulate this through this process? Can you put an end to it? Uh yes. So through the chair there are a number of uh uh items that uh the um staff can review and and secure as part of the site plan control uh process in terms of uh the site configuration and layout uh and access. Uh in terms of some of the more nuance transportation stuff, I'll just pass it over to my my transportation colleague. And I'll just add to that question. For instance, can we regulate a site plan that physically can't accommodate a tractor trailer? So there's no point in bringing one there because it just can't fit. I just wanted can we do that legally as a city? I just need to know through the chair. Uh first and foremost, councelor, um we do look at access um uh in terms of uh whether the access driveway will accommodate the intended vehicles. Um uh so we do look at that through the site plan process and we try to secure access design that will accommodate the the anticipated vehicles. Um, we did see the video earlier on of a tractor trailer uh accessing the site. I'm not sure offh hand uh much of a common occurrence that is. Um, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I don't know off hand. What I can tell you is is that generally speaking, the types of design vehicles that usually use storage facilities such as this are more like moving trucks, uh, MSU type vehicles that have, um, that that have a a large cube, uh, storage area in the back, not the tractor semi-trail vehicles that we were looking at the video. Um, again, I'm not suggesting that this does not happen. I'm just saying it's probably not a common occurrence based on the information that I have. Thank you. My time's up. Second round of questions. Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Don't worry, Council Pr. So, I'm just going to ask a few quick ones. Excuse me. Um uh on this, we heard about um potential um minimal impacts to traffic. But we also heard from deputants that there are examples where we have um for instance uh food trucks that are parking on the site and likely coming on a regular basis. I know from personal experience visiting with nonprofit organizations for example that operate out of storage containers in our community on a regular basis. They have volunteers and etc. Not on the site um but for example. Is it safe to say that business uses may operate on more of a regular basis within storage facilities than for example a homeowner storing extra uh stuff between moves? or do we see that type of use in storage facilities more often or is can you confirm if that is in fact the case uh through the chair I I can't speculate as to other uh uses that may occur that are not permitted through the zoning bylaw the zoning bylaw uh would only uh permit the self- storage use on the subject site right and so my question is and this may not be a question for you and I can I appreciate that's fair um but the ways in which people interact and utilize storage facilities is evolving Is that a is that fair to say? Uh through the chair, uh I can only comment on the application that's before us and the proposal for self storage use. Okay. Um have we done any work to confirm the um traffic impacts that have been proposed and put forward to the city? Have we run our own numbers or review traffic um patterns in that area in more any more detail through the chair? Um what we did do is as I indicated earlier we reviewed the transportation study that was done by the applicants consultant and we also looked at available data um that the city gathered in terms of volumes in the area. Um we did not go out and do our own study of any kind. We did not go out and do a trip generation survey of the existing site. Uh we could do that uh but as of yet we haven't done it. Our our our review was based on the information that we have right now. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um I had one more question with respect to the difference between land use and zoning. Um we have many interested parties here today that are not um planning experts. Um this is as I understand the land use and we've discusses neighborhoods but the zoning is industrial. Can you give a little bit of an explanation between um the difference between those two things uh through the chair? Yes, certainly counselor. So um wi with the uh you know land use designations uh that we have in in the city of Toronto. These are through the official plan. These are large you know citywide um uh land use designations that apply to many different uh sites and are high level and p uh not as prescriptive. there are sort of a uh much more general and uh in and sort of driving the uh intent of what large areas of the city are expected to uh expected to be in terms of uh on the ground situation. So here we have a neighborhoods land use designation. This is a land use designation that applies to to much of the city of Toronto and includes a wide variability in terms of what actually happens on the ground in terms of residential and non-residential uses. So um it's a very very high level um you know in planning in Ontario we have uh you know the planning planning act uh and then we have you know provincial uh planning policies and then local policies through the official plan. Once once you get below that level, then you get into the more prescriptive sort of nuts and bolts uh what actually will happen on the ground uh and that's through the zoning bylaw. That's how we actually implement uh some of these higher order policies. So here uh for the subject site, as was mentioned, it's uh zoned industrial class one. Uh that's in the topico zoning code. Uh to be clear, not in the citywide zoning bylaw. Um and so that uh really gets into the the more detailed um situation. So here, you know, for this application, we have a site uh an amendment to the official plan for this one specific site in recognition of uh the unique uh situation to permit this self- storage use within but but maintaining it within neighborhoods and then the zoning bylaw implementing the more detailed um specifications how how tall the building can be, what the setbacks are, how large it can be. Got it. Um and so within the report before us under official plan with respect to the policy and regulation considerations there is a note here that says the current and proposed use is not permitted within this land use designation. Is that correct? Yes, that's correct. Okay, I'll leave my questions there. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Further questions? Councelor Peruta? I I remembered that short little question I had earlier. Why isn't this a um committee of adjustment application? Uh so through the chair uh this uh the site has uh as as was mentioned uh conformity uh issues with regards to the official plan. So it needs to be brought into compliance through the site and area specific policy to permit self storage as a use. But you but you said earlier that uh it was a legal use, not a not a grandfather use or a non-conforming use. I see that it's colored yellow in the official plan in the in the mapping here on on your in your report and across the street on the other side is is is orange. I think orange is like apartment blocks or something, right? And and this is mixed. It's a it's a mixeduse uh uh OP designation and on this site, right? But but given that it was it's legal and that it's been there uh so if you if you look at the tests of the committee of adjustment uh uh basically uh in sync with the zoning bylaw an enhancement to the site uh and I don't know what the other test is but it seems to me that it meets all the tests of the community adjustment application. So why is it like a full-blown reszoning? So, uh, through the chair, uh, just a point of clarification, the site is designated neighborhoods under the official plan. Um, and, uh, yeah, as was mentioned, one of the reasons for for the application is it's not only a zoning bylaw amendment application, it's also an official plan amendment application or to bring it into compliance. Um, I can't necessarily get into all the the four tests of of minor variance and potential for for that, but I would just flag that uh, in terms of the uh, compliance with the zoning uh, bylaw as well. While the use is c certainly permitted today and and could be continued in the future, it's the the size of the building is as uh restricted by the current zoning bylaw to just uh 3,500 square meters. So really what's currently on the site and the expansion of the self storage us is considerably beyond that which would typically times larger is not minor in in your view? uh through the chair. I think it's fair to say that is one of the uh considerations that uh you know in terms of the minor test uh an expansion of this degree would not be considered to be minor. No fair. I just wanted to to understand that. Thank you. Uh further questions? I'm gonna ask a couple more quick ones I think. Um, without going into the speculation space, if the zoning has was homogenized with the area and it became residential, what are the kinds of things that could be built here? Um, and again, I'll I'll be careful not to speculate on what it is, but but what what would a townhouse development look like? I think it's 600 meters from a a future transit station. So what what would we be looking at as a council if it went the direction of residential uh through the chair to you counselor? Uh yeah, if uh the site uh again we we can only assess an application that's before us today. But uh uh in terms of the uh existing uh the context in the area and the uh neighborhoods land use designation that gives us an idea of what kind of uh residential development uh could could be uh could have potential on the site and and in neighborhoods in the in this official plan designation. Uh you could have uh single detached, semi- detached all the way up to uh smallcale apartment buildings that are less than four stories. Fourstory apartments. any sense on how many units could be yielded from a site of this size? Uh through the counselor? Uh no, I'm not able to estimate that. Uh that was all my questions. Thank you. Um members wishing to speak, um did you want to go first? Yeah. Okay. Um councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair through you. Um I do have a couple of comments on this one and I first want to start by thanking the local community for showing up today um and for being deeply engaged uh throughout the process on this file. We have been um really wanting to see how we can use our voices together for um positive you know outcomes when it comes to planning and development in our neighborhood. And we know that we are one of the largest and fastest growing wards in the city of Toronto and that comes with a huge amount of pressure and a lot of complex um challenges to work through. My interpretation of this site was that it was uh the facility is legally non-conforming. We heard some clarification from staff about that. But I think the bottom line of the matter is we understand that this use does not belong in a neighborhood area. Just because it is permitted to reside there currently does not mean that it should be allowed to expand. We have a storage facility with residential neighbors on three sides um at low scale and with small children and vulnerable communities without sidewalks. Uh in many instances, the majority of residents in this area have expressed concern that the proposal will worsen already elevated health risks, public safety issues, traffic hazards, and overall quality of life. Gala Lane and Mod Menota Road lacks sidewalks and experiences regular speeding. My team is currently exploring adding additional trafficcoming measures in this area. Allowing this development to proceed would increased truck with increased truck traffic and worsen the pedestrian safety concerns that already exist. And we saw detailed and heard detail today from the residents that are most impacted. The type A loading spaces are for very large truck. We heard from our um colleagues in transportation planning, I believe it was 53 foot trucks would be accommodated in type A loading spaces. The site is only accessible for vehicles by using the local streets. Expanding this facility would result in more vehicles, including those large trucks, driving on these local streets. Allowing this facility to expand would go against the city's vision zero goals. the existing um the existing uh site is not desirable at this location. Sorry, the expansion of this is not desirable at this location and allowing it to expand is also not desirable in my um view and I know that my community agrees that this should be rejected by this council and I will be voting today against this application to expand. I hope my colleagues will join me and I'll leave it there. Are there members wishing to speak? Can you follow that? Well, uh, if I just I'll just speak for a minute. Um, you know, I have a number of storage facilities in my ward as well, but they're so quiet. I've never had complaints and, uh, very quiet. We don't have all those trucks and tractor trailers coming into the area. Mind you, they're not in residential areas, but still I've never received a complaint, but this one in particular seems to be a real issue. Um, and uh that has continued and um with the expansion, I think in my opinion, I think it would be worse as well. So, I just wanted to make those comments that I um I I I I've never seen such an issue for a storage facility before. any ones that have come into my ward, they've just been passed and no issues. Residents don't have a problem with it and I've never had complaints. So, um I I I agree with the the community on that issue. Other members? Um so, I'll take a minute. Go ahead, Stace. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead. I I I'm going to support the local counselor on this. Um uh but but I I would just you know add a minor caution to this that if uh this ultimately uh does not go in and is ultimately turned down uh these good folks are going to be back here. I know it uh and and the application before us will be far more egregious than the application that's here today. So um I just I just lay that out there and I hope that that doesn't come true. Uh, I will take a moment to Sorry. Go ahead, counselor. I'm that little screen there. I have to look look hard to see you waving. Go ahead. I thought you had a big screen there. You could see me bigger than life. I guess not. So, but uh thank you. Uh, so I'm just going to echo some of the comments that we heard and and uh I can understand uh fully understand the community's concern. I too will support the counselor's recommendation to refuse. This this is not the right thing to do right now. Uh and I'm I'm not sure I'll be as dramatic as councelor Peruta that that we're going to get any uh any other uh proposal that's going to be more uh challenging than the one we have right now. Um I there's definitely other opportunities for this site that maybe uh could be uh investigated um as as a result of what's going to happen here today. And I encourage all parties to sit down and and maybe look at those other opportunities as long as the community is fully supportive of what happens. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. And folks, I'm I'm sorry I just have to ask not to applaud. It's could be it's against the rules, but everyone understands. Um otherwise, we'd all be making Yeah, you've never done that. Um I'm I'm going to speak and uh I want to to acknowledge a few things. This is very difficult, this item. Um a lot of thought clearly has gone into it, including a lot of work at the committee here. Uh, I want folks to know that if it doesn't get passed at community council today, it gets forwarded to city council and city council. There's a group of 26 people from all across the city. They'll look at the staff report. They'll think about a bunch of things including the advice from this committee and they'll make a vote. Uh, they may pass it, they may not. Um, you only have to look at the patterns that are contained in our meeting minutes to know what is likely to happen. Um, I am very tempted to vote no along with the local counselor. I I want to support councelor Mley on this. Uh, I really do. Um, but I also have thought very very carefully about what I think is best. The problem we got put into here was done back in 1978. Somebody, some group of people thought it was a smart idea to put an industrial use into an area that had been planned for residential. says that in the report says that a number of things can happen on this site. I also listened to what people told me and and uh a lot of the things what they told me are things that I can imagine happening. Uh trucks coming and going, absurd things happening at the beginning and end of the day, people parking in the parking lot there, potentially people living in these units, all the sorts of things that disrupt the peace of a neighborhood. Many of the there's two categories of impacts. The first is of the building itself. So what does the mass look like? What does the light, the shadow, you know, the sky view, how does that affect the neighborhood? You know, that's its own package of of things. And that's very um very planning like uh to think about those. The second group of impacts are those that are external to the site, people coming and going. And in this case, it's trucks. And we know that in any neighborhood, people are going to speed. I've been looking at some of the numbers from the data that's available in the open portal. I got the answers to my questions about the existing conditions and what the potential growth is. And I don't disagree with those. I really don't. Of course, there's going to be more trucks. There's more units. The question then becomes if city council refuses this, do we recognize that that is a political decision? And do we recognize what happens uh when we are in a planning regime that makes decisions based on planning? And what happens if this gets challenged further? And part of the lens is is you look at the planning merit on the site. Can the site accommodate this? Yes. Is it consistent with the existing use? Yes. Is it then the responsibility of the city to deal with the additional um traffic pressure? I also think about what happens um if something else was built. It could be larger, could be more traffic. They could change the use today and generate more traffic and nobody could say anything about it. Um, so we're stuck in this place of imagining what could happen and how worse it could be. But we also have to be realistic about what they could do anyways or get away with. And the final piece, and this was really important, and this was about the site plan. And that's why I asked those questions. Can we as a city regulate things that are obnoxious on the site and regulate them out? And one thing that's really big to me and I heard the answer was there was no vision for onsite parking storage. So no Winnebago, no food trucks, no additional things that are parked out there. This is a self-contained building, silent. Those parking spots are for the residents. Hopefully they'll lock the washroom. They'll deal with it in that manner. And so from that lens, uh I have to wonder will it will it be better despite the additional traffic? Will the traffic will will it be less obnoxious? And so my conclusion is that I'm going to vote yes on it. And I I I really feel for the neighborhood and I feel and heard what they had said, but I have to take a very responsible lens on this of if it doesn't go through, what else could there be? And I think councelor Peru Peruta is very wise to say that, you know, if this doesn't go through, what what could we be talking about here at community council? So when people said, you know, how could a reasonable person do this? How could someone take accountability for it? How could somebody not see that? I wanted to make sure that I explained that that there was a thought process into why I've supported this. And I appreciate the politics and I want to just say yes to despite the community, but I also want to be realistic about where this goes in the future and and tell people there's rationale in that. So, we're going to do a recorded vote. Um, and I'll ask you, Madam Clerk, to go ahead. Uh, but thank you for allowing me to speak. On the motion to adopt the item moved by councelor Holidayiday. All those in favor? Councelor Holidayiday. All those opposed. Councelor Mley, councelor Nunziata, councelor Perusa, councelor Chrisanti. That motion fails. The item will move to city council without recommendation. Thank you. So, thank you everybody for sitting through patiently on that and for speaking. That item is now complete. Uh we'll move on back to the top of the order paper. Item number sorry item number EY 31.1 750 Queens Plate Drive zoning bylaw minimum application decision report we have a speaker registered we have Chris uh Pereira from M Bahar Planning and Design Limited. Uh Chris, welcome to community council. Um if you just give it a second for folks to clear the room. So Mr. Mr. chair. So, Chris is here to just uh you know, for the sake of just uh outlining what this proposal looks like for my colleagues here and uh uh and and then maybe to respond to some questions. Thanks. I believe I believe he's the only speaker, correct? Uh he is the only registered speaker. Thank you. So, it's it's now pretty quiet in here. Why don't you go ahead? Good morning. Hold on. Still morning, right? 11:50. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of committee. Uh my name is Chris Pereira. I am the principal of Embahar Planning and Design Limited. We are the planning and urban design consultants for the applicant. Um the application before you here today for zoning bylaw amendment recommendation of approval is the result of a long process. Um we are happy to confirm that we have coordinated and worked closely with staff, residents, and the counselor's office to arrive at a final form that all parties are uh content with. The application for zoning bylaw amendment represents a collaborative effort to arrive at an appropriate build form that balances the apartment neighborhood designation with a variety of build form criteria uh outlined in the official plan to ensure an appropriate fit for the site as well as the surrounding area. So, briefly, I'll cover off some highlights of the proposal um just to get the facts and stats out there. Uh we are um showing a 17story building has an FSI of 6.1 or a floor space index which uh which is a measure of their density. Um we have 148 units that's broken down to about 48% onebedrooms, 47% twobedrooms and 5% 3bedrooms. There is a total of 330 m of indoor amenity space, 308 m of outdoor mini space. both above the minimum 2 m per uh unit uh requirements. Um 103 parking spaces uh that is 87 residents, 16 visitors and finally 125 bike parking spaces. So in our view the uh proposal will be a positive contribution to the area. Uh for some time the this property has been the focal point of vandalism, theft and a multitude of police matters. Um this approval will be a significant improvement for the area and the surrounding dwellings. Uh we've had multiple meetings with residents and a number of them have been very clear um in their um express support for the application particularly um appreciative of the investment, the redevelopment and the revitalization of their community. We believe the proposal is consistent with the provincial policies uh provincial planning statement. Now uh and it also maintains the intent of the official plan. Um and it also implements the varying city guideline documents including the tall building guidelines, the growing up guidelines which is why I highlighted the unit mix and also the pet friendly guidelines. Um we have read the staff report and we agree with the recommendations contained therein. Um and I am available to answer any questions uh committee or um residents may have. Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Is there anyone else to speak on this matter? Yeah, Mr. Mr. Chair, I um I have no questions, but uh and I'm happy to to uh to speak and move the staff. Any questions of staff from community council? Seeing none, councelor Croanti to speak. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. So, you heard from the deputent. Uh we have worked very closely with the community. We've had public consultations. This is a very welcomed development up in topical north and let me just highlight we don't get too many of these developments. So we are quite excited about it. It's an opportunity for another 148 wonderful units for people to come out and enjoy the wonderful things we have up in the topogical north. And uh the applicant uh did a a great job in ensuring that they were listening to our to our community, responded to the needs and they as you uh heard agree fully with the staff recommendations and uh willing to comply with whatever requests are they're being asked of staff and work very closely with them uh in a very timely manner. So on that note, Mr. Mr. Chair, I will move staff recommendations and uh if my colleagues are good with this, I they should look for your support here. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Croissant. Anyone else to speak? Seeing none on the uh recommendations before us, all those in favor? Any opposed? That item carries. Our next item is EY 31.3 2915 2917 2939 2941 and 2943 Blur Street West a zoning bylaw amendment application. This is an appeal report. We have registered speakers. Our first speaker is Phyllis Stern. Thank you, Phyllis. Welcome to community council. You have five minutes. Thank you for your time. Okay. My name is Phyllis Stern and I live at 34 Bermuda Avenue which is a street just behind the proposed 29story tower. In 2018, I attended all 12 days of the OM Alpat hearing for 2915 2917 Blur which is the subject site. The tribunal ruled on six stories and thank you for your past support that you made that possible. The developer wanted a review of this decision and it was given and then they wanted an appeal and they were always they were unsuccessful. Finally we had a mediation and seven stories was agreed on by the parties. the parties were supposed Oh, during that mediation, those other buildings that are now involved with this development were bought by Rioan and um they were to come back with a plan and they also were to come back with uh traffic. They were supposed to they never came back with this. Instead, they came back came back with this 29story proposal. Now, I have many issues with the proposal. the my main issues really are pedestrian safety and traffic, but I'm not prepared to talk about that today. I did write a um participant statement for the Ontario Land Tribunal and I was talking about those issues specifically and I would be very happy to forward that information to you and my report to them. Today I want to talk about some things that I find deeply disturbing. Today um one young family on Bermuda Avenue have lived in their home for 15 years. Their property backs onto the laneway. They recently underwent a new major renovation that included an addition at the back of their property. Before they ex this they even began they were totally aware of the tribunal's decision for six stories. And while the renovation was underway the community was notified about the application for a 29story tower. That's gut-wrenching. It's a young family. They just moved into their home just a few days ago and it was such a joy to see their girls on the street playing frisbee once again. But uh okay, I want to relate to another current thing that's happening. In 2024, a home was sold on G Grand View Avenue, uh which is Grand View Boulevard, which is and the home is just around the corner from Bermuda Avenue. In 2025, the home was demolished and a new home is being built. They have been working on it for a year. Last week, I finally got to meet the new homeowner and uh he said that the home won't be finished for another two months. He told me the reason why he's building his home here in our area was because of the neighborhood. Now, unlike me, when I was coming into the neighborhood, I was looking at the architecture. That was my what I desired. Uh but he he's building a modern home and this is a very high quality construction project. He spent a fair amount of time talking to me describing his materials and I couldn't find it in my heart to tell him about this proposal because I didn't want to take away from the joy he was feeling at the moment. Well, you may not be aware of this, but just west of Gren View, the entire block of buildings from Blure from Blure Gren to Ellfield has been sold to developers for the locals. That means between Royal Bank and Magic Spot and one developer in particular has been I'll tell you it's been real has been actively buying more properties. This is happening north of Blur as well. The King's Way has been found. Of course, there's a tremendous amount of worry about the high volume of traffic from towers, pedestrian safety, and the feeling feelings that people are feeling of instability. Six or seven stories on blur would have left us a small amount of our area's uniqueness and charm, but towers will destroy it. And this proposal is clearly not about providing housing for families. Can you wrap up please? Or protecting the families that already live there. This is the proposal. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Councelor Mley. Thank you. K. Yes. Hi Phyllis. It's great to see you again. It was wonderful to meet you at your doorstep a few years ago when I was knocking in your beautiful garden and home. Um so I really appreciate you coming today. I know you're directly impacted by this uh application. I wanted to ask you um you mentioned about the history on this with the OOLT hearing and the previous decision around seven stories. As I'm sure you're aware and have been following the conversation, there's been new legislation from the province. There's been things around um priority major transit station areas of which Grenview, as we know, has a a station there uh connected to Royal York. I'm wondering if in this current context you could share with us what you think would be a more appropriate height um on this site understanding that we are going to see some growth and I know the community previously had said you know six or seven would be acceptable what do you think today is acceptable on that site I agree with you 29 stories is too tall uh what do you think would be a more acceptable um reflection of the local community and respect for the local community well knowing the lane way that I do, knowing how our side street Grand View Boulevard is being used by pedestrians and knowing about all the traffic we're already receiving in our community from the developments that are happening north and south on the Queensway and east and west. We're having development all around us and we feel we're we're trapped and knowing that I I can't give you a magic number but if they could work with the six or seven story seven stories which was agreed upon would be I think is most appropriate and and it wouldn't uh yes and that's my answer. So thank you. No I appreciate that and thanks for taking your timeless. Thank you. Any further questions? Seeing none thank you for joining us today. Oh thank you. Our next speaker is Sonia Coops from Sunny Lee Kingsway Community Association. Welcome. Uh, you have five minutes. Thank you very much. Good morning, or I guess maybe afternoon. My name is Sonia Coops and I'm a member of the board of directors with the Sunny Lee Community Association, the SKCA. And I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak at this meeting. I would like to take the time to share with you our participant statement for the upcoming OOLT hearing, the Ontario Land Tribunal for this property. SKCA formed in 2016 specifically to res represent more than a thousand households in opposition to the proposed ninestory development on the subject property. After significant fundraising, we hired expert witnesses, a lawyer, a planner, and an urban designer, and sought party status along with the city to oppose the development at the OM/LPAT. In a decision rendered in 2019, the application was refused and the tribunal invited the applicant to revise plans for a building of up to six stories. And we just are calling into question any revisions to planning policy and guidelines that would allow a development that is more than three times the height of the previous proposal refused by ELPAT. To support this development is to radically change development objectives for this site in the six years since this development was rendered. I want to thank the city for its past support and to urge council to vote to support continuing opposition to this proposal. Thanks. Thank you. Any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Our next speaker is Tom Goth. Good afternoon, Tom. Welcome to community council. got five minutes and we'll just give you a sec to get that stuff up. I was just putting this up. I don't speak to Okay. Um, there have all been already been a lot of substantial and thoughtful feedback from the community regard regarding the inappropriateness of this application and the infrastructure concerns it raised. So I won't repeat those points. My main concern is with the motion itself. As written, it doesn't give me any confidence the city will take a strong and un unequivocable position at the Ontario Land Tribunal. phrases such as continue discussion with the applicant in an attempt to resolve outstanding issues and the applicant has not adequately demonstrated the site can accommodate a 29story building suggests a willingness to gently negotiate rather than clearly oppose. I urge council to strengthen the motion by providing more explicit and decisive direction to the city solicitor and relevant staff. This may necessitate council requesting an updated appeal report with a clearer and more robust list of issues. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there any questions of this the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Uh that was the last speaker on the list. Is there anyone else here to speak to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff? Yes, councelor Mley. Go ahead. Thanks, Mr. Chair. through you just to uh pull on the feedback from Tom and good morning Alli. Um the recommendation before us today is clearly to go ahead with opposition to this application. Is that correct? Through you m through you Mr. Chair. Yes, that's correct. And um can you highlight some of the issues of concern that currently exist um on the city from the city's perspective with respect to this application? Uh there are a few concerns mainly related to height uh and transition and the second one is about the uh uh service vehicles entering to the laneway. Great. Thank you. And um we are if supported today uh by the local uh community council staff in um collaboration with legal city legal will proceed with opposition to this application through the appropriate channels. Correct. Three, Mr. Chair. Yes, that's correct. Thank you. Those are my quick questions. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Any further questions? Seeing none, members wishing to speak. Uh, councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you, I will be moving the staff recommendations today to continue um to oppose this application on the city's behalf and with thanks to the uh residents who've taken the time to join us today. Um, we had a very very very well- attended meeting in person on this application. Well over a hundred if not 150 community members 200 Phyllis is correcting me um members packed the church at St. Andrews Presbyterian just a few months ago with this applicant um and the clear consensus across the board was a strong rejection of a proposal of 29 stories in height. That being said, uh we heard again from deputants today including Phyllis about the growth and the pressures that have come to Atobbokco Lakeshore and significant development uh is being considered and contemplated along many of our major avenues including Blure, the Queensway, Lakeshore and others. our at last check uh last year we had almost 70,000 units of housing in the pipeline uh in our ward alone and much of that is concentrated along the blur line where we have existing higher order transit. The reality is we do have mandates for growth in the city. We have strong um legislation from the provincial government to pro to proceed um with growing our city and putting growth where it can be supported and where it belongs again which is near higher order transit. That being said, while we appreciate and respect the need for our city to grow and to make more space and housing for more families, we need to do that in a really respectful and thoughtful way. And it's important that we're doing this mindfully and collaboratively to the best of our ability with the concerns um and feedback of our local most impacted communities uh in mind. And so with that, I will be moving the staff recommendations here to proceed um with opposition to this application with the hopes that we can work collaboratively through mediation and other opportunities um to get to a better, more reasonable application in an area that is yes set for growth. that is yes adjacent to transit but does need to be reflective and respectful of the local community as we proceed. Thank you Mr. Chair. I will be asking for a recorded vote. Thank you. Madame clerk if you could record the vote please. On the motion to adopt the item moved by councelor Mley. All those in favor, councelor Morley, councelor Holidayiday, councelor Nunziata, councelor Croanti, all the councelor Perutza that item carries unanimously. Thank you. Our next item is EY 31.4, 4 which is 468 Montgomery Road a residential demolition application. We have a speaker Gavin Ba Bailey from Tridell. Welcome Gavin. Uh good afternoon. You have five minutes. It is uh thank you. Good uh good afternoon and uh uh good afternoon as chairman, members of council, city staff. Uh my name is Gavin Bailey. I am the director of planning and development for Tridel. Uh, I do have a presentation. If you could pull that up, please. Uh, hang on here. Um, we'll check with the clerk. Do we have a presentation anywhere? Yeah, we did submit, but we do have it on a USB drive if possible. Do you have a device to display? I don't, but I can still speak to the app. Yeah, I don't know that we can we have the equipment to display it for you. Okay, here's what I'll do. I'll use this thing. I don't know how good that's going to be, but we'll get to it. So, hang on a sec. I'll just I'll ask the AV. Ah, there we go. Okay. Okay. And we've got electronic access to it if you've submitted it. You know what? We'll we'll go old school. How about that? I like that. I'll reset your time and invite you to read. Yeah. Okay. Great. So, uh, the purpose of, uh, of this application is for a demolition application for the homes located at 46 and 8 Montgomery Road. Um, these lands form part of a larger development proposal, uh, which you see here highlighted in yellow. So, this is the OOLT mediated uh, uh, site plan uh, drawing. Uh what we have here on this site uh collectively as the as the uh overall development is a 16story stepped back building. Um the 52 almost 53% of these lands will be dedicated to the TRCA for environmental stewardship in perpetuity and those are the lands that are north of the subway tracks and directly to the west of the site. So a I mean a large portion of the site will be uh dedicated for environmental stewardship. This here is just a uh rendering of the developments uh that we envision for these sites and again 16 stories approximately 345 residential units. So part of uh our demolition application is the upkeep um of the property and I just wanted to show you this image here. This is the auto dealership sort of past and present. So, in 2022, you see the current or the previous condition, and you see now what we have here on the site is a sales center, and we have spent approximately $3 million um updating the uh uh the car dealership for our sales center. You see, it's uh fully um renovated. Well, fully renovated, but painted. Uh we we've landscaped. We've uh re retardred the um uh the the parking areas. It's lined. It's maintained. any type of graffiti that is on this site, we remove it within 24 to 48 hours as soon as we're notified. So, we have very strong upkeep and maintenance of the site as a whole. And this is just an image of the current homes that we're seeking to demolish is four, six, and eight. So, just quickly, um, you see my notes here. So, all three of the dwellings are currently, uh, vacant. Um, and we're going through the, uh, the disconnection of all the utilities for all three three homes. Um, we submitted an engineering assessment, essentially a contamination report back in January of this year. And you can see here, without going into too much detail, there's widespread contamination as bestes in these houses. um especially in the plaster finishes that form part of the wall floor construction of the home. So, it's a structural issue. Mold and water damage have also been found um and confirmed during the inspection affecting the wood structural elements of all of the homes. The damage it's progressed to a point where treatment essentially is very very difficult. So what that means if we were to remove this the asbestos and deal with all the mold we're going to literally demolish these houses to its bare bones and that is just cost prohibitive. So this essentially the structures would need virtually again to be demolished in order just to do the um uh the abatements of the uh contaminations within the homes. So given the extent of the contamination structural deterioration that we feel that de dem demolition is the reasonable and feasible option in this current state it's significant risk of vandalism fire dumping drug use etc. So we're very concerned about that they are um becoming quite derelict. Uh so following the demolition that area will be backfilled, fenced, sorted and properly maintained until construction of the larger site does begin. So it is my respectful uh opinion and my respectful request that this council support recommendation three of staff report which would approve the demolition with specific conditions from staff and I'm happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you for your deputation. Are there any questions? Um um councelor Mley, good afternoon Gavin. Thanks for joining us today and for the submission. Um you uh have a number of uh rationale for the application before us including safety and security concerns. Um can you give us a little bit more um information about whether you've had incidents specifically or issues related to those safety and security concerns on the properties? Uh we haven't heard any significant complaints from members of the community today, but we do monitor the site and we are concerned about squatters. we are concerned about um drug use within that area. So, we definitely want to maintain the site as clean as possible. So, there haven't been any specific complaints. We're just trying to be a bit more proactive and ensure the safety um of the community. Great. I can totally appreciate that. Thank you. Uh what kind of environmental assessments need to be undertaken on the property and how long do you do they uh typically take? Okay, that's that's a that's an interesting question. So the site is as a whole significantly contaminated. Um we are currently going through three environmental risk assessments with the Ministry of Environments. Uh so that work is ongoing. So um we're currently going through the reporting process. There's monitoring, constant monitoring that happening right now. So through the planning process and the risk assessments, it is our responsibility to clean these lands to residential standards. And we're going through that process. It's lengthy and uh we're just going through it now, but there are three risk assessments that are happening currently on the site. Um with respect to the redevelopment timeline, uh you showed the renderings for the approved um application uh coming to that site which will be a nice improvement to that corner. Um but we understand that those approvals happened back in 2020 I believe. um what is the redevelopment timeline um that you expect um to adhere to and or like is is before you in terms of um completed site plan on this. Okay. So we are going through the site plan process now. So we're just about to finalize the section 37 agreement plus our uh notice of approval conditions or NOAK. Um essentially that process is somewhat stalled a little bit but we just need to finalize those agreements and have those conditions issued to us by staff. Um but that won't happen until the agreement is signed the section 37 agreement is signed. So from the you know once the site plan approval process is wrapped up uh we hope that when we spoke about this we'll go to market on these lands potentially sometime next year. I can't guarantee that unfortunately just because of market conditions but that is our current projection for uh market and sales and then we'll go through the building permit process uh for the larger site. Okay. Um typically the city doesn't often issue demolition applications before a building permit is issued and that's really just to maintain to ensure that there's limited um lag time when sites are sort of unkempt or or um or that type of thing. If we were to reject the demolition until a building permit is in place, how would that decision impact your timelines? Um, I don't think it would impact our timelines to be perfectly honest with you. Uh, so I would if if the application is refused or the decision is to refuse the demolition applications, the houses will remain in its current state. And uh, if it's approved today, what type of state uh, do you intend to have or what's the timeline for the demolition? Uh, and then what type of state do you anticipate leaving the site in? AB between market. So uh we will uh start demolition in June or July of this year. Um we will ensure uh compliance as far as safety. Uh the ultimate condition it will be solded and it will be fully maintained to appropriate city standards and you can see we have a vetted interest in maintaining the site to a proper standard. It's part of our brand. Uh we have no interest in keeping the site any derelict than it needs to be. Thank you so much. Those are my questions Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to ask questions? Seeing none, members to speak. Um, I'll speak. Uh, thanks, Mr. Chair. Um, yeah, thank you so much. Uh, we appreciate this application and, uh, again, we know this is, uh, been a long-standing file in this area. Uh, and something that, um, you know, we hope will we'll have the right market conditions to move forward. Uh, with that dedicated land over 50% to TRCA, we think is a great improvement in and around Tom Riley Park. Um I do want to note that we have had a history of challenges when we have approved demolition applications on sites where they are not prepared to go forward and largely that's been because of um land owners not adhering to the conditions that are set in place. We know that demolition of older properties can lead to things like pests uh you know getting displaced and those have impacts on neighbors uh as well as when the sites are unkempt weeds long grass all these types of things become unsightly and unwelcome in the local neighborhood. That being said we do have uh certainly a reality here with a contaminated site um and a need to make sure that it is maintained in safe uh and good condition in the interim. And so we will be moving forward at this time with um I'll be moving recommendation number three which is to approve the application to demolish the existing residential buildings with conditions. Um the conditions are um to construct a fence around the uh according to our fence bylaws um if deemed appropriate by our chief building official. So we'll allow that conversation to proceed. that of course all debris and rubble be removed immediately after demolition and that saw be laid on each site and that the sites be maintained free of garbage and weeds in accordance with the municipal code chapter par uh 62910 paragraph B and 62911 and that any holes on the property are backfilled with clean fill. Um this as we know we just heard from other um neighbors on previous file in this neighborhood is a well-loved and well-kept community, a well-loved and well-kept neighborhood. Uh and it's going to be really important that as this demolition is granted and I know there's a commitment by the uh land owner here um to continue to be a good neighbor and keep it in good um maintainable order. We will be in touch if it is not. Um and we trust that you will uh proceed in a good way. Thank you so much. Absolutely. Thank you. Any other members wishing to speak? Seeing none on the motion from councelor Mley. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Members, we have about 7 minutes before our scheduled break. I'm going to propose that we move uh through quick releases. We still have uh 15 items to go. Um 15 or 16. Uh there are several speakers, but I'm going to go through a couple of the items to see what we can uh deal with today right now. So, and I know councelor Nunziata, you'll be pretty quick. You have just a couple of minutes to speak. So, excuse Mr. Chair, I got a couple I could quickly take away councelor Croanti. We're going to go through them in order. Uh, so EY 31.7 is 280 Driftwood Avenue, a request for fence exemption. We do not have registered speakers for that. Councelor Pruda, do you want to move that or do you want to hold it for questions? No, I I I have no question. I just wanted to just see the motion on the screen recommendation to move approval of the exemption. Microphone want to move. So, so let me just read the grant offense property. Yep. I'd like to move uh the fence exemption. Yes. Okay. See it on screen. Councelor Pa moves the approval of the fence exemption. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. The next item uh and we can I do you want to do these together? Councelor Nanziata? It's 11 and 12. Yes. Okay. So, I'll read the names out. EY 31.11 Maple Leaf and Rustic Neighborhood Streets Plan and EY 31.12 Maple Leaf Drive and Fall Staff Avenue traffic safety improvements. Councelor Nunziata, go ahead. Yes. Uh just on 3112, I'll just move the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries 111. On 311, I just want to make a few comments because we do have staff in here. Um first of all, I'll put my motion on the screen. Um okay. Um just quickly um we um few years ago about three years ago I I had staff um to do a traffic study in the Maple Leaf and KE area um from Kil Street, Jane Street, that whole area. And so in the past couple of years, we've been having um number of meetings with residents and we formed a steering committee actually and we had residents sit on it bringing forward their recommendations, what their concerns are. We had two big public meetings where we had over 100 residents that attended and uh I want to thank staff. They're here in the council chambers. And so they so finally um the report came forward and um some of the recommendations that they were moving uh what I advise staff that I want where there were streets where they were going to change the parking regulations that I wanted personally because I promised the residents at the public meeting before any changes are done that I would do an internal poll of the residents so they can comment. So, I did that on on um a few of the streets and that's why I'm moving that uh recommendation because these particular residents that I did the pull on didn't support what was in the report. So, I'm deleting those recommendations. Um the the big issue for us and at the community was the intersection of Keel Lawrence uh the congestion that we have there. As you know, we have the 400 and 401 and um the big concern was on the congestion that we have there and there was actually a development application that came through community council last day um that uh that was appealed and I expressed my concern so along Keel Street. So, um I did um uh amend the staff uh recommendation on number um at the at number one and two and three. Um I think the focus should be in that area and that's the consensus of the community that we have to have staff to come back and look at reconfiguration of that particular intersection. Um because there's a lineup for traffic turning on to Lawrence and maybe we have to widen the roadway and add an extra lane. um and relocate the TTC bus stop. So that was the consensus of the community and that's why I with the staff um I recommended that one report as being really the priority on the concerns that the community have. So I'll move my motion uh for deletion um and then move the report that we have before us and thank you to staff that are here uh for their report. Okay. On councelor Nunzi's amendment, all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. And on the item as amended, all those in favor. Any opposed? That carries. Um, next item. Uh, so 15 has a speaker. 16. Uh, EY 31.16, Shockley Drive, Mingle Haze Drive, Alabaster Road, Guyad Spring Drive, and Plowshare Crescent traffic calming. Uh, councelor Croanti. Uh, thank you uh, Mr. Chair. So, uh, on this item, I just want to clarify there are alternate recommendations. And I just, uh, so I'm going to be moving staff, uh, recommendations, including the alternate recommendations. My question to somebody there, clerk, is is do the alternate encompass everything or they both need to be moved individually? Do we need to hold this down, Madam Clerk? Yeah, hold it down. Okay. So there's a yeah something something is missing councelor Cassani. So we'll hold it down. Sorry. What's missing? We'll deal with that right after lunch. Yeah, we'll get that straightened out. Okay. Ey 31.17. This is a temporary traffic control signal and compulsory stop control on Highway 27, Royal Crest Road, Baywood Road, and Mars Road. Councelor, do you want to move that? Staff recommendations on this one. Thank you. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Ey 31.20 is Hacket Avenue an accessible parking space. Councelor Peruta EY20 Hacket Avenue accessible. Staff recommendations. Can we see the motion on the screen? The staff recommendations. Okay. At number 20 Hacket Avenue. So, he's moving. Councelor Peruta moves the staff recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh, councelor Morley, do you still need to hold number 21 Marquee Avenue parking amendments? Sorry, Mr. Chair. Just bear with me one moment. I did. We hold up for speakers or we ready with Not on 21. I have a motion. Sorry. Um, yes. Thank you. It looks like clerks are ready with the motion on this one. Um, and we're looking to expand three-hour parking permissions on the west side of Marquy Avenue by 15 meters south and to leave the existing no parking anytime on the east side of Maris Avenue. Um, and so with thanks to staff with their support on this, I'm happy to move this amendment and release this item. Okay. So on the amendment, all those in favor, any opposed? That carries. on the item as amended. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. And the last one was an item of new business. This is the laneway. So, EY 31.26 Royal York Road and Bluer Street West laneway service standards W3. Councelor Mley. Um, sorry, Mr. Chair. Do you want to do you want to hold it or do you want to just move your Yeah, hold it after lunch. Yeah. Which item is it? Sorry. If I can let the new business the lane way. Oh, yeah. I'm happy to to I believe move that one quickly, but I'll do it quickly after lunch just in case um want to make sure I don't have any questions of staff. So, we'll hold that. Uh thank you. Uh we're going to break for just pardon me. All good. Uh so we are going to uh break for lunch back at 1:30. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon everyone. I'm calling the meeting back to order. Uh before the break, we disposed of a number of items. Uh so therefore, the top of the order paper is EY 31.531 Queen Anne Road, application to remove a private tree. We have a registered speaker on this item. Our first registered speaker is Nicole Curado. I am seeing uh Nicole is not online. Nicole, are you in the room? No. Uh so that are there any other speakers on EY 31.5 31 Queen Anne Road application remove private tree? Seeing none, questions of staff? Seeing none, um councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, this was an item we had deferred from previous uh community council for an opportunity for my uh office to visit the homeowner uh and to observe the tree in real life uh to hear a little bit more about some of the challenges related to the tree and some of the um concerns that are being raised as a result. Um the tree is a very large Oh, sorry. Motion. I will be moving an alternate recommendation to approve the tree removal with a replanting plan. Um clerks have the motion. It's on the screen before you. Um this tree is a beautiful largesized tree. It does overhang significantly uh the backyard of the neighboring property as well as the roof structures and rear structures of the um property applicant property. Um there are significant lo large branches that have fallen in the past and it also has created a quite a significant number of um neighbor disputes as well as some property concerns related to um related to the very large um mature roots as well. Um we have a very strong position of support um for trees especially mature trees in our community. Um so it does need to meet you know attest um and really have significant concerns for us to move with alternate wrecks. Um but we do feel like that is met in this case uh and we'll be moving the staff recommend uh we'll be moving the alternate wreck. Uh anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none uh councelor Moley moves uh alternate recommendations. All those in favor any opposed? That carries. Our next item is EY 31.6 6 51 Burnhamthorp Crescent application to remove two private trees. We have registered speakers. Our first speaker is Marcus Bokelman from district. Uh good afternoon Marcus. Welcome to the Utopa York Community Council. You have five minutes. Good afternoon. Thank you. Um sorry. Would you just mind just doing a microphone check for me? Tus. No. Could you hit see if you can hit the button there? Tus. Much better. Thank you. Please go ahead. Um, is there a uh some assistance to plug the laptop in? Uh, someone's coming right behind you. So, give it a second. I'll get started in the meantime. Okay. Well, why don't you why don't you hang on? Let's just We'll get it working. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Hello. Uh, Mr. Mr. Chair, members of council community, my name is Marcus Bokelman and I'm here as the developer applicant. On September 25th, 2025, our minor variance application was approved for a new purpose-built rental forplex and garden suite totaling five units, including six parking spaces with staff support subject to the submission of an application to urban forestry to injure or remove trees. I just want to point out that these types of um approvals that staff supported in this case are exactly the types of gentle density urban infill development that the city's new growth policies are intended to support and encourage in residential areas. However, when we filed the application, urban forestry denied the removal of the two trees number 10 and 13, which directly conflict with the construction of our project and the number of parking spaces required to support this development. So, just uh directing your attention to the uh slides. This is a elevation of the front and the back of the proposed project. It's just a two-story uh structure. And here you see the original site plan showing the radius area of trees 10 and 13. We worked with urban forestry and staff to move the parking, shift the parking towards the rear of the lot. I'll show that on my next slide to try to accommodate these trees. The trees are shown on the pictures below. They're not protected or heritage trees. Uh they're relatively small trees about a circumference of 6 in wide and uh not deemed to be significant or protected trees. In fact, the our orburst classifies them as an invasive species tree. Here's the new site plan that we worked with staff on to move the parking to the rear of the lot. You can see the radius circle 10 gives significantly more space for the uh tree to exist. 10 would still be impacted. However, urban forestry felt that tree number 10 would still suffer damage and potentially die with the overlap of the radius in one of the parking spaces. The other uh change from the site plan is that the entrance to the main building, which is on the side of the building, was moved with staff support subject to the tree resolution to the back of the building. This was to provide easier, safer access with stairs going down to a terrace where you can have an outdoor amenity area with a couple of chairs and a side table as well as offer more light into the lower level unit. In this case, just continuing here for a couple of more minutes. Um since the original tree uh removal, oh pardon me, we had a meeting with urban forestry staff in attempt to find a solution to retain the trees and our parking. We offered various alternatives in terms of materials adjacent to the trees, shifting our parking further from the trees. However, a res resolution could not be found and the only option urban forestry offered was for us to remove two or three parking spaces to retain both trees, which would significantly negatively impact the rental project. Furthermore, since the time of the original tree removal application, the entrance to below grade unit was required to be relocated from the side of the building to the rear of the building, further impacting tree 10 and making it extremely difficult to build a rear uh step entry into the unit while ensuring that the tree protection zone is respected. Given that this pro project is purpose-built rental with large familysized units, including three-bedroom units up to 1,700 square ft and two two-bedroom units at 800 square ft. Many tenants will likely have children and therefore cars, and we absolutely require the six parking spots approved at the committee of adjustment for this project to be viable and rentable in terms of the tenant demographic marketing profile for the absorption of these units. The vast majority of tenants renting these larger family style units will own and rely on cars for daily life. And that is just a fact. These tenants will be families residing in three-bedroom units that are equal or larger than the average single size of a single family house. To conclude, these tenants would be professionals residing in upwardly mobile established in affluent community and is expected that they will own cars and require parking. Six parking spaces are required on the site to protect against tenants parking on the local side street, which is what the neighbors primarily wish to avoid. The parking condition and parking spaces required requested are typical of housing units in this node. Family units of this size housing this tenant demographic profiles simply cannot be rented to without parking spaces that support this type of development and housing demands. Based on the re the review of the current plans, market history and local demographic tenant profile profile urban nation a third party finds a third party consultant finds that the provision of six parking spaces is allocated in section five of their memo included is required for this development to be marketable and feasible. Urbanation is a leading real estate marketing adviser for marketing and feasibility analysis in urban planning and development. Thank you. questions of the speaker. Uh, go ahead, councelor Morgan. Thank you. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for your submission. Um, I had a question about uh root exploration and and you mentioned that you had some conversations with urban forestry related to alternatives. Can you elaborate a little bit more about which alter what alternatives were explored or put on the table in this case? Uh, sure. There's a few other trees on the property that um have been granted removal and we are replanting trees at a ratio of 3:1 to replace those. These are the only two trees the urban forestry deemed not to be removed with their support and it directly infects the entrance of the rear of the building and the two parkings two to three parking spaces. We did try to shift the parking spaces to the rear the parking edge of one of the parking spaces. Urban Forestry felt there was a chance that the tree would be injured and not survived and didn't support the uh parking space in that case. Furthermore, we also looked at alternatives at a grade elevation mechanism where the car drives up onto a cage that is supported above the root system so that the weight of the vehicle doesn't touch the ground. Urban forestry found that to be unacceptable and not supportable. Okay. Is there a path forward where one of the two trees are able to be maintained? Just based on the quick review of the um site plan that you shared under understanding I think it's number 10 that now is impacting the rear entrance as well as light into the the unit there. Um but it does appear that 13 may still have a viable path to uh some injury but not needing to be completely removed. Are you open to an alternative of trying working towards the maintenance of at least one of those trees? I think our team and urban uh our arborist agrees that 10 uh would be impacted um and would require the removal of that tree because it's affecting three parking spaces in this case on its own. I believe that 10 has a significant probable chance of surviving if it was left there given the minor overlap of the parking envelope edge. In this case, urban forestry doesn't want to take that chance or doesn't see it that way. I would propose um subject to your support that we plant another tree on the property to replace the loss of tree 10. Are you open to planting a mature tree? Are you considering a a new because we are talking about a 58 cm diameter in one case and 59 cm diameter in the other case. They're fairly mature trees. Are you looking at um a re ratio of replanting or just a one for one? I'm proposing a a one one. Um I'd have to consult with our arborist in this case and our landscape architect. I I do understand that we could find a place for another tree to replace this tree and of course it would be um have the potential to grow into a mature tree. Thank you. I'll ask some questions of staff as well. That's all for me. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Any other questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Thank you. Our next speaker is Nicole Curado. Clerks have indicated that uh Nicole Curado is not online. Are there any other members of the public wishing to speak to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. Councelor Moley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through you to staff, uh I understand the request to remove the two trees is connected to an application for a two-story forplex and garden suite that we just heard about from this um from the uh proposed from the uh previous speaker, sorry. Uh that was received with COA approval. Is that correct? Through the chair, that's correct. Do they do the approved variances require the removal of the two trees or can the development proceed while preserving the trees through the chair? The variance that we commented on at CFA was regarding parking at the front of the property whereas these two trees are impacted potentially by parking at the rear. So have you had a chance to assess this version of the submission for tree impacts? So the most recent version um is the plan that we've shown in the report um that still shows an encroachment um of parking spaces and walkway within um the protection zones of the two trees in the rear at the rear. Has urban forestry engaged with the applicant to explore workable solution? If so, what was the outcome of those discussions? We did have a meeting um with the applicant, urban forestry staff and and the applicant. Um we did talk about some preliminary options. Um though we mentioned in the meeting that determining whether those options were feasible and allowing the trees to be preserved in a manner that would allow them to survive well and healthy and not be destabilized. Things like a root exploration would be important as it could help inform the type of pavement section that might be suitable around the tree um in consideration of the depth and extent of rooting. Um and I think that's where our conversation kind of um that's where we kind of ended it. Uh the applicant mentioned about an alternative option related to caging and some other structural um suggestions. Uh was that something that you all reviewed and discussed together? I don't recall us going into depth at that meeting that I participated in and that may have been something that was brought up with a member of my team. Um but again in looking at those options um we would need to factor in again more information about the rooting of those trees to see based on you know the product that they're using and how you have to construct it in accordance with those specifications if the two things could you know be mutually you know allowable on site. In your experience, um, subject to a root exploration, have there been, uh, workable paths forward to maintain trees in instances like this where there is parking or other hard surface abudding or directly adjacent to the tree that would allow the tree to survive? Yes, there there have been examples of that. It's it's useful information especially when you're dealing with larger encroachments into a protection zone and where different types of you know in this case maybe a pavement section um is constructed differently and knowing where those roots are it can help us weigh out those decisions more effectively or alternatives more effectively. Okay. Um should this item be deferred today? Would uh urban forestry staff take it upon themselves to follow up with this applicant um to further explore those alternatives? Yes, we would be open to do that. Those are my questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Are there any further questions on the item? Seeing none, uh members wishing to speak, councelor Morley. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Um, I appreciate the submission here today and I I am aligned with the type of housing that is being proposed here. I've been a supporter of Ehan and gentle density within neighborhoods including uh in communities like Islington Village. Um, we do know that this is uh within 15 minutes a walking distance to Islington station which is a major transit station area. And while I do note the need for the car and certainly for family-sized units, I will just reiterate that fact um that we are really working hard to um a have minimum parking requirements for a lot of good reasons, including maintaining characteristics of our neighborhood, which includes the very healthy tree canopy that we're lucky to have here in Atobbico Lake Shore. Um so I am going to move a deferral on this item. And while I appreciate um the applicant has done a good amount of due diligence on this, it sounds like there's a little bit more explor exploration work to be done to just have a very clear understanding if there's a possibility to save these trees or maintain them on the site. At the very minimum, one of the trees would um be appreciated to do that additional route exploration. So, um I am going to move deferral of this particular item to May with a request to staff to do a follow-up with the applicant uh on those further options and examples of where it has been possible in the type of um uh construction materiality or other opportunities that might be uh exist for them to consider uh in this case and we'll look forward to reviewing that again in May. Thank you. Anyone else to speak on the item? Yeah, I'd like to comment further. I'm I'm sorry, our process doesn't allow for that. Uh may I suggest that you get in touch with the counselor and discuss it? Um so this matter will be deferred. Uh we had the motion up there. Uh all those in favor of the deferral. Any opposed? That carries. Uh our next item is EY 31.8271 8271 Valermo Drive request for offense exemption to the China Municipal Code Chapter 447. Uh we have speakers registered. Our first speaker is Georgina Stockman. Is Georgina here or online? Okay. Um I'm seeing not present. Uh our next speaker is Keith Coffee. Good afternoon Keith. Uh, welcome to the Atobico York Community Council. Please come on up to the front. I also have McKinnon. Yeah, this is my wife. I was wondering if we can just uh uh you Yes, it is permissible if you wanted to present together. Uh it take a bit of extra time that is allowed. Uh or you can present separately. We'll just give that a moment for you to connect everything that you need to connect. So, just some context. Uh, this is just hang on one sec. So, that I do need to get you to one person or the other in front of the mic. Okay. Uh, because I won't be able to hear you and neither were will all of the uh people that are listening online. So, yeah, whoever wants to talk, you just have to switch positions otherwise. Are you ready and all set to go? Uh, yeah. I just wanted to make note that uh this location is where we're uh basically residing. We're right there. Okay, perfect. So, just for some context. Why don't you go ahead? Good afternoon, esteemed council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. We have lived in our home for 17 years. The fence in question was completed in September 2024 and is both functionally important and visually appealing, contributing to the safety, security, and privacy of our property. Its design has been wellreceived by many neighbors in the community. Structurally, the fence is sound and poses no risk to public safety. While the bylaw permits a maximum height of 2 m, our fence plus lattice measures approximately 2.2 2 m, an increase of approximately 7 in, which is all lattice. The fence plays a critical role in addressing longstanding safety and privacy concerns. In 2018, the city of Toronto, supported by the Royal York Baseball League and the Toronto Blue Jays Care Foundation under Councelor Mark Grimes leadership expanded the Connor baseball field to include a secondary ball field, new playground, and increased parking. The volume of visitors that the ballpark has does not meet the available amount of parking which has visitors parking on our residential streets, increasing foot traffic, walking past our home and looking into our property. Additionally, our neighbors at 269 Valermo, their westfacing bedroom window looks directly into our kitchen, bathroom, and backyard. We have some pictures for context. Previously, without the fence and full lattice, our kitchen window, which faces the ballfield parking lot, was fully exposed to individuals parking at the field for evening practice and night games. The current fence with lattice provides a sense of safety, security, and privacy that we can enjoy our home without direct view of the outside world, our neighbors, and it makes a positive difference in our overall mental health. The area between our driveway and 269 Valermo, their side portion, throughout the years has consistently been unmaintained with accumulated garbage, overgrown vegetation, unsecured hanging roof wire, and currently an unpruned unknown bush standing at approximately 8 ft 8 in. As our side door that exits our driveway is the main ingress egress location of our home and backyard. Given these conditions, we installed a fence of sufficient height to protect our property, vehicles, and have a comfortable and proud experience when entertaining family and friends. The fence is entirely on our property and does not impose any maintenance obligation to 269 Valermo. The setback of the fence provides ample natural light to s 269 Valermo's window and space if 269 Valermo chooses to maintain their property. the fence cost and labor all provided by US 271. We had also supplied city council letters of support in favor of the fence exemption during the application process. When the bylaw officer visited and discussed the matter with us, we promptly gathered and submitted all required documentation for the exemption within a week. We have kept councelor Mley and her staff informed throughout the process. We respectfully request that council approve our exemption based on the information, photographic evidence, and context provided. Thank you for your time and consideration today. Thank you. Are there any questions? Councor Moley, go ahead. Thanks for joining us today. Really appreciate the submission and for keeping us in uh informed throughout the process. I did just have one quick question because there's uh conflicting information. Um, from your submission to the neighbors, um, the window that you described on the neighboring property that has a view into your property that is now pretty much blocked out from this fence, is it pretty is the privacy concerns addressed with this fence is the first question. Um the second part to that question though is from your perspective and understanding has there been any um impact to the light that goes into um or shadow impacts is what I'm looking at um for the neighbor as a result not from our uh understanding because uh we've actually taken photos uh they they have not sorry they have not actually come and addressed any issues with us. um they've been non-communicative on that aspect. Um but just from viewing like the photos from the sides and the angles, it looks like there's no impact because the way that the sun Travis um sorry reach travels over the roof of the house. Uh they get all the sunlight up until about 3:00 where at that point it's basically starting to ease over and our light is basically becoming non-existent as the day progresses. And your house would likely block it, correct? naturally at that point as well. Correct. Um can you talk to me a little bit about the uh beams across the fence? It's a bit of an unusual um situation. We don't see that very often. Can you tell me a little bit more about why those are in place? So, when the fence was originally erected, uh it was used uh via stake spikes and it wasn't bored into the ground 4 feet below frost line to prevent heaving. So, when I uh used stake spikes, the fence had an actual heave to it. Um it became apparent that it needed to be rectified and the easiest way to do that was I spoke to Paula Thompson a municipality building and uh was informed that there was no need for a building permit in order to erect such a structure. Alex Coats uh came to my property and also forward me an email indicating that unless it was to be sheltered in to build the carport or so forth, no permit was required. Okay. And aesthetically it just looked nice. Yeah. And just to confirm, do you have any intention on in the future sheltering it in or putting any additional coverage or any additional no pieces onto it? Because then that will stop the light coming into our driveway. Right. So the plan is to leave it as constructed. Correct. Okay, that's helpful. Those are my questions. Thank you. I had a couple if that's okay. That's okay. Um, did you build the fence? I did. What kind of boards did you use for the the main boards? Did you buy them off the shelf? I did. What size were they? Uh 1.6. I'm sorry. What's that in feet? Oh, sorry. Uh 1 foot by six feet. They're six foot boards. Did you cut them? No. No. Okay. You just use six foot boards. And uh how close is the bottom of those boards to the ground? Uh, it was approximately 2.5 in. About two and a Okay. Two and a half inches. And how tall is the lattice on the top? Uh, it's just under a foot. So, one foot lattice. Okay. Just under. Okay. And they're still put on spikes. Uh, yes. That and that's why you have those cross pieces. I had that correct too when I saw it. Sure. No, for sure. Uh, sorry. We can't tell from the pictures. That's why I uh I have to ask. Oh, okay. I appreciate it. Thank you. I had no further questions. Anyone else? Councelor Nani, just have one question. When you made deputation, you mentioned baseball. What was that all about? Oh, it's just that um they the Blue Jays and uh Ro York baseball league. They actually redeveloped the initial Connorville baseball park in addition put in a banttomsized one for uh youth and If I may add to that, the portion of the lattice that is there, our kitchen window faces directly onto the ball field. So that additional height of the lattice actually gives us a blockage when we're looking out our kitchen, which we have one countertop. So when I'm prepping, my kitchen window is here. That bit of lattice gives us privacy from seeing the cars that are parked there. So sometimes if the ball field has a rain out, people are running to their vehicles. They're hiding out in the cars for long periods of time. They're turning on their lights. They're sitting in their vehicles. They have direct view into our home. Our living room faces the parking lot as it is. So spending a lot of time in the kitchen, we want to be able to have the windows open, especially with nice air, and be able to have privacy, feel like you're not being looked at. Okay. Thank you. Um, thank you. Any further questions? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Uh, is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. Oh, that's my pleasure. Yeah, councelor Mley. Questions of staff. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You guys can grab a seat and staff will come up and answer our questions. Thank you so much. Good afternoon. Thank you. Um I just wanted to quickly inquire. We heard a little bit about the unique condition of the uh boards across to support the structural integrity of this fence. Um from your examination, is this fence structurally sound to you the chair? Um based on the inspection we conducted, um as per the bylaw requirements, the fence is structurally sound. It's maintained in good order, in good um condition. And any other concerns when you went out to observe this fence to you the chair? As per the bylaw, the fence is maintained good condition, up to code as per the bylaw. Okay. Um those are the only questions I had, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions of staff? Seeing none, Cly to speak. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, these ones are always tough and I do regret. I think there was another Oh, motion. Um, thank you, Mr. Chair, for the reminder. Move the motion off the top. Um, I will be moving um to allow um the exemption in this case with conditions. Um, the condition of course, as always, is that it's maintained in good order, um, in good condition, and any future fences on this property will need to be in compliance with the city's bylaw. Uh we understand there is a small discrepancy in this case which the lattice represents the uh overage in height. Um and so that will be need to be rectified in in future. Um these ones are always tough and of course people's homes are their sanctuaries and it's so important. We appreciate the investment and the care that goes into um keeping your home and and our wider community uh in in good shape. Uh again I do regret unfortunately we weren't able to hear directly from the other um neighbor I believe on the other side was the other person here today. Um but I do appreciate often when um you know shadow and light impacts do take come into play that that can be difficult. It sounds like there is limited impact in this case um and again the fence is been built in uh a structurally sound way and has had a net benefit for the um existing residents. And so we will provide the exemption here today. Um that's all for me. Um just on a point of order, the clerk has notified me that the language for the motion is in the ether right now. So you've spoken. We'll hold this down. We'll get that sorted out. You might be able to resolve this with the alternate Rex right now. Yeah. Yep. That's sufficient. It's really to go ahead with the granting of the fence exemption permit to the property owners here at 271 Valermo Drive. And that at such time as a replacement of the fence is required. The installation must comply with city uh municipal code chapter 447 fences or its successor bylaw. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh thank you, Madame Clerk. We're okay with everything. Great. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none on the motion from councelor Moley. All those in favor? Any opposed? That item is carried. Our next item uh EY 311069 Whitmome Hill Boulevard construction staging area. Um with the consent of the committee, I'm just going to ask that this be held down just while we finalize the motion on it. It should be pretty quick. Which item is that? Uh number 10. Yeah, we'll just hold that down. There's no speakers for it. We're almost there. Our next item is EY 31.15 which is Delta Street, Gamma Street and Beta Street, traffic calming, speed humps. Uh we have registered speakers. Uh our first registered speaker is Rick Lipman and the note says video conference. Um the uh clerk staff is indicating that Rick is not online. Uh our next speaker is Leslie Jansen. Is Leslie here or online? I'm seeing a no. I'll ask is there anyone in the chamber uh wishing to speak to this item? Seeing none questions of staff. No questions of staff. Uh councelor Mley to speak. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to be moving staff recommendations on this item with thanks to um the local community for their engagement on this opportunity. Uh our transportation services staff are recommending speed humps on Delta Street, Gamma Street, and Beta Street between Evans Avenue and her Avenue. Um they are proposing 15 speed humps on Beta, 16 on Gamma, and 15 on Delta Street. Um the estimated costs and um of the total number of speed humps is included in this report. Uh and we're also looking at in recommending the reducing of the speed limit on Gamma Street from 40 to 30 uh which aligns with our citywide residential street um speed limits. Um speed humps on all three streets were requested um due to persistent demand from residents. Um Delta Street, Gamma Street, and Beta Street are straight cutroughs um between streets Evans and her. We pulled all three streets as we always do as part of our process to make sure that there is local demand and interest in this opportunity and we have received a significant amount of support particularly on Beta Street where we have a really active uh community health center at Franklin her um which has a very vibrant seniors program amongst many other um important school uh important community services as well as Vincent Massie Academy which again are both located On Beta Street, the poll results um broke down by household. Beta, we have over 74% of residents in favor and Gamma Street, we have 69% of residents in favor. And on Delta, we have 65% of residents in favor. Uh we of course, as always, have a number a handful of residents who prefer not to see speed humps in their street, and we thank them for their participation. Um but we do want to proceed with uh the support of the majority in this case and again moving the staff recommendations. Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you councelor Mley. Anyone else to speak on the item? Seeing none. All those in favor of the recommendations. Any opposed? That carries. Uh e the next item. Actually I'll check. And madame clerk do we have the the wording for number 10? Great. So we'll just take a step back. One item by 31.1069 1069 Whitmome Hill Boulevard construction staging area. Any questions of staff? Seeing none, uh, members to speak, I will speak. And I will move a very brief motion. So, I'm going to move the I'm going to move to adopt the staff recommendations, but of course, I would like to add one item, and that is that the Tobokco York Community Council direct the general manager transportation services to temporarily pause the issuance of any new on street parking permits on Whitom Hill Boulevard until such time as construction is completed on Whitcom Hill Boulevard. And members, I will explain uh why I have moved this today. So, the report before you provides for a construction staging area for a large infill project. Uh, we uh you may recall that we approved this at this community council. It is an infill apartment building and a second infill apartment building on an apartment building site. Whitom Hill Boulevard has a number of apartment buildings along it and it also has a really busy um park next to it, Richview Park, which has baseball diamonds and soccer pitches and it is very busy during the summer as we we heard uh from the one of the previous items uh in a similar manner. um when the infill apartment project uh has become underway as we're seeing with this report which is taking away some of the traveled portion of the road and is going to reduce the available parking in order to maintain the sightelines. Uh there's going to be a bit of pressure on parking and so one of the things is that there is a block in there that has on street parking permits. It's one of the rare places and this motion simply says don't give any more out. Um allow the people that have them to stay but don't increase that further. And the reason is is because the infill apartments are going to be in a temporary condition where there's no visitor parking. And uh and because of the park and because of all of the stress on the street, every parking space counts. So that's why I've added this and I hope you will support that. Question of the mover. Question of the mover. Well, um, well, this this application was appealed, right? So, does this motion that you're moving has to be sent over to the tribunal? No. This is only for an on street. Okay. So, it's the So, they don't need that information when they city staff, right? No. No. Okay. No. The the development approval has happened a long time ago. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Um on the amendment, all those in favor? Any opposed? That's carried. On the item is amended. All those in favor? Any opposed? And that is carried. Our next item is EY 31.22 Kaledan Road parking amendments. We have a speaker, Kareem Arafat. Is Kareem here? Kareem is online. Uh, good afternoon Kareem. It's Steven Holiday from the Ittobokco York Community Council. Can you hear me? Okay. Yes, I can. Can you hear me? Very well. Uh, welcome. You have five minutes. Please begin. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. Good afternoon. My name is Kareem Arafat. I've been living on Kaledan Road for close to seven years right now. Um, I'm speaking today in strong support of this parking amendment on my street and I want to thank Councelor Mley and her staff for moving this forward. Um, the issue really has been going on since the point that I've been living here uh on this road. I'm the sole address currently on this road, but I also share the road with my elderly neighbors across the street who have an address on Grand View Boulevard. Um what might seem like a simple parking amendment is actually has been a a daily quality of life issue um relating to Bishop Allen School that is across the pedestrian bridge from the from the park parking lot of the Berry Road ravine. Um during the school year a street basically becomes an unmanaged parking lot for the students of of the school. Um and also it becomes an informal pickup and drop off zone for the parents with vehicles stopping, idling, turning around adding chaos basically to our street twice a day. Also the students who do drive to school um come and park on our street from you know from the the point that school starts till school ends. Um, this is also an overfill from the fact that the ravine parking lot itself becomes completely unmanageable and with no room to park whatsoever. Um this is aside from the fact that students drive at extreme speeds up the ramp from from um the ravine itself, honk, playride music. Um um which makes it absolutely impossible for us to traverse the street or for any deliverable vehicles or any of our guests or even garbage trucks and garbage. They basically decide to leave collection on our street till the end of day after the school ends. Um this also is causing huge headache for my neighbors across the street which thankfully who I'm also speaking on the behalf of today have not had to the gentleman across the street is in poor health and have and ambulance has had to attend to their uh residents multiple times in the last while and if this was the case during the school day they would be not able to uh make it to their home. Um, this is not an occasional convenience. It's a repeated predictable weekday pattern that happens during the school year. We have tried everything uh in our power. I've I've dealt with the previous counselor in office um relating to this. Um we've uh you know, I've also been speaking to councelor Morley's staff on and off for the for the past uh three to four years. We've contacted parking enforcement. We've raised concerns about the school. We've reached out to the principal. We've submitted a petition back in 2022 and we were told that enforcement and education um would help. The reality is is that without posted parking regulation, there is really no lasting solution. And none of these um enforcement blitzes or educational reminders are really working primarily because it's mostly students that start to drive in their final year of school and um new ones come the following year and the whatever education that is required basically doesn't follow through. Um um I feel that the proposed restriction is also modest. This is not about preventing legitimate access to the street. It's about preventing all day weekday parking during the school period when the problem actually occurs. The request is targeted, practical and I feel proportionate. I also want to emphasize this. This is not about hostility towards students or the school. Um, students need a place to park and parents needs to safely drop off their children. But a narrow residential street like ours with basically two homes on it is has basically turned into an unofficial school parking lot and pickup zone at the expense of us um the people that are living on the street. Um, also I want to mention even though unrelated to this parking sign is that if you know during the school year you wanted to actually visit the ravine and the um um to go for a walk or walk your dog or whatnot, you'd basically not be able to during the school year because that parking lot now has become an extension of Bishop Allen. Of course, this is aside from the fact that students litter despite there being garbage cans and and recycling bins right there um at the foot of the bridge. Um for years, we've asked for a basic remedy. No parking during weekday schools. It's a simple low cost lowcost measure that I feel addresses um a a clear and documented um u problem. Um, after nearly four years of emails, petitions, follow-ups, enforcement calls, and frustrations, I'm grateful that this is finally before community council. I'm simply asking asking that you give us our street back. Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none, thank you for joining us. Was there anyone else or is there anyone else here to speak to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff uh to speak. Uh, Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. through you. Um I do have a motion and I'll be moving the staff recom Sorry I will be moving the staff recommendations. I don't have a separate motion. Thanks Madame Clerk. Um and I just want to say um a thank you to the deputent for his persistence. Um, I know this is it seems like a small issue and you said off the top of your remarks that it has been while it's a small street and only a couple of residents directly impacted, it has had a significant impact and it is something that has been under discussion and you've been advocating very strongly for in the last number of years. Uh, I am sorry to hear that the neighbors uh is experiencing poor health and wishing good health and and speedy recovery to them. I know this has also uh been an item they've been regularly um advocating and in touch to try to get some action from um this community council and certainly from the city on. Uh we heard extensively about what some of the challenges are and I do think that you know education and enforcement while critical we do need to have the correct conditions in place. Um we believe that with the implementation of these staff recommended signage and the uh parking prohibition um from 8 to 5:00 pm Monday to Friday on both sides of the street um is a it's a small stretch of road and a small intervention that we hope will have a big impact. I'll also note that Bishop Allen is subject to a re um redevelopment or some significant construction coming uh I believe uh soon and my hope is that while students have a few years of interruption from being at school on this location, hopefully this um habit of utilizing the street in this way um you know is no longer needed once the uh uh renovated school uh comes back online. And with the implementation of these updated signs and expectations, uh we hope that will add to um that future outcome. So with thanks to colleagues and staff on this file and again certainly to both neighbors uh directly impacted, we're glad to be able to move this forward on your behalf today. Uh and hope my colleagues will support it. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none on the recommendations. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Uh members, I did skip over an item and I think we should go back to it. That is EY 31.16 Shockley Drive, Mingle Haze Drive, Alabaster Road, Guy Hun Spring Drive, and Plow Share Crescent Traffic Combing. Uh, and yes, councelor Croissant. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And is Guehon Spring, Guehon Spring. Thank you, Guehon Spring. So, uh, thank you very much. And I was going to say something and but I didn't want to interrupt. You were already at the other item. So um like councelor Mley, we went through very extensive uh consultation pulses for this particular pocket of North. Um and um the vast majority of people in that area really want to see traffic coming in place uh in the form of speed humps. Uh we have two elementary schools just on Gon Spring. A lot of high traffic in that area. What I'm going to be doing, Mr. Chair, is moving the alternate recommendations. What I wanted to do early is just confirm with staff that the alternate recommendations include everything uh we talk about in the staff's uh first recommendation and the alternate recommendation is going to be all-encompassing of what we discussed. If I can get that confirmation, I will then move the alternate recommendations. Yes. I I can't hear but maybe you could tell me, Mr. Chair, what staff have indicated a yes. So the alternate recommendations covers everything that we uh uh agreed to. Okay. Well then in that case I I am moving the alternate recommendations uh for uh speed humps for this pocket. Okay. So on councelor Croanti's amendment. All those in favor? Any opposed? That's I'm sorry. So that is a complete replacement. Thank you Madam Clerk. So on the amendment, all those in favor, any opposed, that carries. And on the item is amended. All those in favor, any opposed, that carries. Okay. And just one more. We're almost there. We got We have two more two more items. Okay. Ey 31.25 25 temporary signage permit for the Atobbokco Rotary Ribfest 2026 community event, which by the way will be held in W 3 this year instead of W 2, but Cloverdale parking lot. It's all in the motion. Uh, but we do have a registered speaker. Uh, is Nicole Curado available? Nicole is available. Um, good afternoon, Nicole. It's Stephen Holidayiday from the New York Community Council. Can you hear me? Yes. Uh, yes. and not available to speak. What I was going to say, there's always controversy about ripfests because of their focus on meat. So, I would suggest that because the meat industry is very damaging to the environment and animals. I would suggest that on all your signage, you put disclaimers stating that this is, you know, health disclaimers and and environmental disclaimers on all your signage. And you know, letting people know that that uh you know, similar to how you have disclaimers on cigarette packages that you put disclaimers that this that meat is not healthy for people and that it it is very damaging to the environment and there's a lot of animal welfare issues. I'm gonna just I'm just going to pause you there just to confirm with you the content of the signage is not before us. So, if I could just ask you to keep your com your your comments to the the content of the item. I would ask that uh I would prefer that the RIFF fest not be advertised with signs. And I would also ask that you if you are going to allow the signs to also allow counter signage from animal rights organizations. Because if you allow the signs without allowing counter signage, um, a lot of animal rights organizations will probably put stickers and stuff all over your signs because I've se seen it happen in in Montreal. I've seen it happen, you know, it's it's inevitably going to happen in Toronto if you put signs. Um I know the kind of people who do this they it will get covered with stickers by uh um outspoken Hagen groups will probably cover it with stickers if you if you allow the signs without um putting some kind of disclaimer or if you don't allow other signs from other uh from vegan groups to counter signage. So that's what I would say that does have to do with this with allowing or not allowing the signage that if you do allow the signage it should have a so yeah the content of it will affect um the signage because it it is advertising a controversial activity. Thank you for your deputation to gain it's going to gain controversy. Are there any questions of the speaker? Seeing none. Thank you. Are there any other speakers to this item? Seeing none, questions of staff. Seeing none, members wishing to speak. Uh I will be extremely brief. Uh members, I hope you support this. Um as you may know, it is a very very popular event uh in the Atobbokco York district uh visited by thousands of people each year. So I uh I think that these will help um ensure that the event operates well. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none, uh um on the item, all those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Um our last item is EY 31.26, Royal York Road and Blure Street West laneway service standards. Uh questions of staff. I do have some, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Um, do two staff all in the room. Um, Mary, thanks. I think these ones will likely be for you. Do all laneways in the city of Toronto have the same service standards regardless of the utilization through you, chair. It's Mary Newton, community council and issues manager for Atobbico. Um, generally, yes. Okay. Um, can residents report issues on lane waste to 311 the same way that they would report issues on roads through the chair? If you're speaking about uh solid waste matters like litter and stuff, I think 311 would direct that to MLS, our counterparts. Um, in terms of road conditions, if they're publicly owned by this the city, then yes, report through 311. Okay, that's helpful. Um and would there's in this stretch of laneway um in in question there is a kiss and ride zone. Uh would the kiss and ride zone receive services like salting at the same time or on the same schedule as the adjacent laneway through the chair. Um I believe the kiss and ride is um operated and maintained by TTC. That's an open question in the community and partially why as why this motion is coming forward. Yeah. Uh so let me take that back to staff and clarify and make sure that we have all the appropriate um divisions lined up to to deal with this particular issue. Thank you so much and hopefully this motion is helpful to that end. Yes, those are my questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Um any further questions? Seeing none, uh members to speak. Councelor Mley. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I do have a motion here and the motion is for a Typical York Community Council request that the general manager transportation services in consultation with solid waste management and municipal licensing and standards report back on the following at the May 26, 2026 meeting of community council. One, the ownership, an entity responsible for servicing the Kiss and Ride zone located on the east side of Royal York Road north of Blur Street West. two, the service standards related to winter maintenance, litter cleanup and removal, pavement conditions and potholes, and parking enforcement for the laneway and the kiss and ride zone located again in this stretch of rural York north of Blur Street West. And third, any historical data related to traffic counts and utilization for the laneway running east west north of Blur Street West. Um, this laneway that we're talking about today is a major artery in the Kingsway community. It's it is extremely well used by residents to access the adjacent Greenpe lots and Royal York station and by local businesses to receive deliveries. Many businesses in the area have rear entrances to allow for easiest easier access for parking from the parking lots, which increases pedestrian traffic. Residents and business owners have experienced challenges when contacting 311 for service requests. Um, unfortunately, sometimes what we see is things get pinged around and ultimately closed without resolution. There needs to be further clarity as to what service standards are maintained for the laneway and the adjacent kiss and ride zone to ensure that it remains safe and accessible for all users. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's my motion. Thank you. Um, anyone else wishing to speak? Seeing none on the motion. All those in favor? Any opposed? That carries. Um, madame clerk, could you just help us? We have the I think those are all items of business. Yes. Okay. May I have a volunteer on the first bill? Councelor Mley. Happy to. Mr. Chair, I move that bills 413 and 414, bills 416 and 421 and bills 423 to 425 prepared for the April 29th, 2026 meeting 31 of the Atobico 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. Last one, Francis. Uh, councelor Danziata that uh, confirmary bills to confirm the legislative proceedings of the atobico community council council acting under delegated authority of meeting 31 on April 29, 2026 be 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. All right, madam clerk, all items of business. Therefore, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. That's pretty good.

Full Transcript