Did I just turn it on? Oh, is it blue means on? >> Okay, it's Oh, wait a second. No signal, it says. Okay. Good morning everybody and uh welcome to the uh council meeting for Wednesday, May the 27th at 9:30. I'd like to call this meeting to order. We are gathering on lands that have been home to First Nation people from time immemorial. We acknowledge that what we now call Richmond Hill is on the treaty lands and territories of the Missagas of the Credit First Nation and the Missaga and Chippoa nations of the Williams Treaty. We also recognize that we are on part of the traditional territories of the Hodnoni and the Hiron Wendat. We would also like to acknowledge all First Nation, Inuit, and Matei people from across North America, also known as Turtle Island, who now reside in the city of Richmond Hill. We are committed to rebuilding constructive and cooperative relationships. So with that being said, uh if you can, I'd ask that you stand for our national anthem. >> Yes, I tried to Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Okay, thank you very much. Uh we have our public forum and I think we have one delegate uh Rahana Wong Jeffers uh regarding school safety, accessibility, transportation accountability and infrastructure design within local communities. So uh welcome and you've got five minutes to address council. >> Okay. Good morning. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak today. My name is Ryan Wong Jeffers. I am a parent, community advocate, and resident who is deeply concerned about the widening gap between modern childhood realities and the outdated systems we continue to rely upon for child safety. I want to begin with a simple but important truth. What worked for children in the 1970s, 80s, and even the '90s cannot and will not adequately protect our children today. The world has changed dramatically. Traffic patterns have changed. Technology, social behavior, community structures, even childhood itself has changed. Yet many of our public safety systems, school infrastructures, and institutional responses continue operating under assumptions that no longer reflect reality. Today's children are growing up in an environment that is more distracted, more overstimulating, and in many ways more dangerous than the environments previous generations navigated. Children today spend less time independently navigating outdoor spaces. Many are more digitally immersed, less situationally conditioned, and more vulnerable to distraction than children from prior generations. This is not a criticism. It is simply the reality of modernization. And when society evolves, our systems must evolve with it. Unfortunately, too often they do not. Across Ontario and throughout Canada, parents are raising increasing concerns about school zone safety, traffic congestion, speeding, distracted driving, insufficient crossing protections, and inadequate containment measures for vulnerable students. And these concerns are not theoretical. Ontario studies have documented thousands of children pedestrian collisions with some of the highest collision densities occurring around school zones and intersections near schools. Parents have found that the overwhelming majority have witnessed dangerous driving behaviors in school areas and many report children are being hit or nearly hit near school property. We continue to see reports of children struck by vehicles near schools, animal attacks occurring near parks and community spaces, and increasing public concerns surrounding vulnerable children accessing unsafe areas adjacent to schools and open concept environments. We also know that parks, wooded areas, and trail systems beside schools can create serious visibility and supervision challenges, particularly for younger children or students with developmental, behavioral, and communication vulnerabilities. Yet despite these realities, we continue to see our environment where aesthetics, convenience, outdated infrastructure appear to take priority over proactive safety design. Open concept layouts, insufficient barriers, confusing traffic flow, limited containment planning. an environments where children, particularly high needs and vulnerable students, are able to and have physically eloped from supervised spaces in 2026. As a parent and developmental service support worker, it is deeply concerning that repeated safety incidents are sometimes treated as routine operational challenges instead of urgent indicators that systems require modernization. I want to emphasize something clearly. Parents cannot carry this burden alone. It takes a village. Families today are already balancing overwhelming pressures. Work schedules, rising costs of living, child care responsibilities, transportation demands, mental health pressures, and increasing societal instability. Safety systems should not depend entirely on parental hypervilligence or to compensate for structural weaknesses. Nor should it be the sole responsibility of teachers who are already underpaid and overwhelmed. The responsibility must belong to municipalities, school boards, planners, policy makers and institutions because when a system fails, it is families and children who absorb the consequences. One of the most troubling realities in our society is that meaningful safety reform often comes after tragedy. A child is seriously injured, a preventable accident occurs, animals attacks happen, a vulnerable child goes missing, and a family suffers irreversible loss. And only then are barriers installed, policies reviewed, traffic studies commissioned, protocols updated. But proactive safety should never depend upon catastrophe. If we can modernize technology, architecture, transportation systems, and communication infrastructure, then we surely can modernize the systems designed to keep children alive and safe. This conversation is not about resisting progress. It is about demanding responsible progress. >> Raana, you're out of time, but are you wrapping up? Okay. Um, so I'm just going to close and say if we want safer communities tomorrow, then we must be willing to build safer systems today. They deserve environments designed not only for learning and development, but for survival, protection, and dignity. Thank you for your time, your consideration, and your commitment. >> Okay. Thank you very much. U, so this part of the the meeting isn't really about a back and forth. It's it's just to present ideas like you're talking about. Um I I do actually share a lot of your frustrations and I would actually be happy to share my perspective with you if you'd like. You just contact my office and we can set up a time to chat. But I really appreciate you coming out today, particularly coming out in person. Thank you. >> All right. Thanks a lot. >> Okay. Uh next item on the agenda is council announcements. Uh councelor Thompson. >> Well, thank you. Thank you very much. uh through the mayor. I just want to uh give a shout out to uh Ryan Ferberg. I'm sure a number of you may not know who Ryan is, but he is a uh um he hails from Richmond Hill. He is currently playing in the Eastern Conference Championships in the American Hockey League with the Toronto Marlies, which is the farm team of the Toronto Maple Leafs, who actually knocked out the Montreal farm team and Columbus uh farm team and also the Buffalo Savers farm team. I just thought I needed to throw that out there, but I definitely want to give a shout out to uh Ryan and uh go Marley's go. Uh that said, go Habs go as well. Um I also would like to uh just give one more final shout out that uh my Eco Family Fest is occurring this Saturday at um Elgen Barrow Arena and Town Park. And uh registration is uh filling up quite fast. So if you're thinking that uh you're going to wait till the last minute, I I wouldn't want to do that if you want to guarantee yourself a barbecue ticket. So, uh, go to my website and, uh, register. See you there. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks very much. A few of those things you said to me, it kind of provoked me a little bit, but I I I am going to hold back and not say anything about that, but okay. Uh, councelor Silvitz. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Mayor, coming from a blended family, I do say go Habs. I I have to and I say it with with pride. Um, thank you very much. Good morning everybody and welcome to our council meeting uh May 27th. Um there's just a couple of things I would like to say. First of all, my um event took place on Sunday at the theater and it was very well attended, Voices from the Hill. And um I just want to take this opportunity once again to thank all staff um event staff and theater staff and my organizing committee um including my own uh the my staff in Ward 5 officers. Uh I want to thank you all for uh your amazing um uh the amazing work that you do in order to ensure that we have a successful um event. And thank you to thank you to my sponsors who also make this possible. and um allow me to uh at the end of the day give money um very much needed money to my two uh beneficiary charities which is 360 kids and the Richmond Hill Community Food Bank. So I just wanted to say that thank you and I just wanted to notate that June is upcoming June is seniors month and Junior's and June is pride month. Um, Richmond Hill has we have proclaimed Pride uh June as Pride Month and there will be a flag raising next week and that flag will fly for the month of June um in recognition of of Pride Month. So, um let's give an extra shout out to our seniors and our 2SLGBTQ um residents. We love you all. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. and councelor Davidson. >> Thank you. Um and I just want to announce that there are um five concerts coming to Lake Wilcox. The first one's tomorrow night. It's from the Borealis Big Band. It's going to be in the picnic shelter which is at the north end of uh Lake Wilcox Park. And I'm super excited that we're going to have a nice outdoor event. Um and thank you to city staff that made this happen. Excuse me. I just want to remind uh Bridgemond Hill residents that uh paid parking is in effect. So, please go uh to Richmond Hill website and get yourself a parking pass to put in the window so you don't have to pay or get a ticket. But super excited. So, uh come on out tomorrow night at 7 o'clock to uh Lake Wilcox Park. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh regional council deputy mayor Chan. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um it's um last weekend was a very busy one. You can hear my colleagues sharing what had happened. Uh particular Saturday, it was amazing. Uh we thought we're having spring but uh spring also comes with rain and sometimes really cool. It was truly amazing. Uh last Saturday uh I host the spring fair at Wman Green Park uh in the afternoon. I uh want to extend my heartfelt thanks to thousand of people who brave the rain to come and based on the pre- registration I ordered 3,000 barbecue food item and half of them were consumed at the venue and the other half were also make to good use. Um some went to um 360 kids in Richmond Hill that was mentioned. uh the other half also go to a shelter in PE region. Uh all in all I also want to thank all my colleagues at all levels of elected office. Um they were basically everybody was there notwithstanding the uh challenging weather uh as well. Um the first responders uh and also community organizations. And I have uh uh here want to give a shout out to uh a Royal Canadian Legion particular branch 375. Um majority of executives were there as well. Um to my really able and very uh organized uh office uh team um led by assistant um Helen and uh the city event team also coordinated by Andrew. It was unbelievable in such kind of weather. We still have such a turnout and thank you everyone for supporting us. It shows that we have a vibrant community and talking about uh community and it's been mentioned the month of June. It's not that far away. Maybe actually about 5 days away. And I'll be hosting on the first day of June the senior this month in the afternoon from 2 to 4:00 p.m. at the uh Elgen Barrow Arena Richmond Hill room whereby would have a panel discussions joined by York Region Paramedic and Senior Team, York Regional Police Senior Safety Team as well as a Richmond fine emergency services public education team. they would have a panel discussion on a number of topics I don't know about my colleagues I frequently get calls about um can you tell me something about senior um well seniors uh some of our caregivers will call me what about this dental care um so uh those par discussion will touch on topics very much that of in the minds of senior caregivers uh dental care home safety fall prevention is good we have Mckenzie health in a community parame medicine which is to help seniors to actually uh improve uh the safety measures at home so that minimize uh the need to call paramedics to take them to hospitals as well as crime prevention and so on so on uh is free admission and bring your questions if you're senior or caregivers and the York Regional Police, the York Region paramedic and senior care team and our fire public health team will be there. So, free admission, no charge. Uh we won't be serving burger that day. It's indoor. So, rain or shine will go on. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Anybody else? >> Okay. Go ahead. Regional counselor Paulo and then councelor Shu. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh just want to give a shout out to York Region Paramedic Services who did a wonderful job with a life-saving seminar that I I hosted at Elgen West Community Center. Uh there was over 200 people attending and learning life-saving techniques like CPR and how to use an AED machine. Um I want to thank my staff as well for a great job organizing that event. And then I just want to give an early um uh notice about uh the bar the free family barbecue that I'm going to be having at Richmond Green on June 20th. It's not too late to register at joe depalo.ca. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you very much. Uh councelor Shu. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh good morning everyone. I'm so excited to share the world six community soccer tournament uh that's happening this Saturday to celebrate the upcoming FIFA World Cup. Uh we'll have 12 teams from different neighborhoods with both kids and adult games running back to back all afternoon and the local businesses from across the city and in what six will also be on site with both showcasing their products and services and also free hot dogs for visitors. Uh but first come first serve uh while supplies last. So just come out and join us this Saturday May 30 from 1 to 6 at Lens soccer field. Thank you Mr. Mayor. >> Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Anybody anybody else? Okay, seeing none, I've got a couple things. Um, first of all, I um I just wanted to say thank you very much to the the staff that that participated in the mayor for a day and thank you to my council colleagues who showed up to uh uh greet Mayor Karina. Uh it was a really great event and this is the third year that we've had this and uh I can't I just can't tell you how uh inspired and blown away I am by the by the unbelievable young people that uh apply for this uh this day and and the ones that end up getting uh to be the mayor for a day. And uh we had a number of meetings with staff, some meetings with some residents about some ideas that uh that she had about health and wellness. And I have to tell you that there's a number of things that I came away with uh from those meetings that I've got to give some thought to as well. Um so thank you very much. I think the the point of this event is to uh help to increase awareness with young people about you know what it what it's like to uh to run a city and and to you know know how that impacts our daily lives. and and I think what we hope to happen after this is they go back to their school and spread the word to uh kids and their families and so on. But I think it's really important that we get young people engaged and this is a a really great way to do it. Uh I'd also like to say uh National Accessibility Week is May 31st to June the 6th. Um we this is a time to celebrate that the progress that we've made and I think we have made good progress in that area. uh but also to recommmit to the work that we still have ahead to make sure that our communities are accessible for everybody. Um there is red shirt day will be on June the 3. So um come on out wear your red and and proudly support that initiative. I also would like to say that today in the Muslim community uh they recognize Eid aladwa and uh this is an important time and I extend my best wishes to everyone for a meaningful celebration. And the final thing I just wanted to mention is um I know a lot of uh my colleagues on council and a number of other lots of other people from the public uh were out uh on um the weekend for the Hill House annual walk. And uh you know it always amazes me the work that Hill House does and uh and quietly does for the community but at a very important time in famil family's lives. And so I really appreciate the work that you do and I'm always really amazed at the number of fans that uh Hill House has and they all come out in force on that uh on that annual walk to show their support and the stories that we hear and the uh the work that we celebrate by the nurses and the doctors that take care of people in their final days is really quite uh remarkable. So thank you to Hill House for all the work that you do and uh I look forward to what the future holds for that institution. uh going forward as well. So with that being said, uh we need to look for introduction of emergency or time-sensitive matters. Seeing none, I need a motion to adopt the agenda. Now, uh there is uh somebody in the that's coming to the audience. Uh Mike Lasion, okay, that would like to uh speak to item 15.2.2. um didn't register to speak so it's not on the agenda but I I would like to add that delegation if I could um so we'll we'll um adopt the agenda with that included so I need a motion to adopt the agenda with that addition so councelor Silivitz councelor Leu all those in favor that carries thank you uh disclosure disclosures of pecunary interest or the general nature thereof seeing none uh we need to adopt a previous council meeting from council meeting minutes from May the 13th. I need a motion for that. Councelor Davidson, councelor Shu. All those in favor? Opposed? That carries. All right. So, uh we have an agenda before us. Uh 15.2.4 Four uh we have a delegation for so it's held 15.3 uh is held to due to delegations but 15.1.1 to 15.2.3 and 15 oh and sorry uh the the delegation is on 15.2.2 so we would hold that as well. Uh but everything else could be uh passed on consent if that's the wish of council. Oh, okay. Uh, councelor uh councelor tree >> I thank you so much mayor. So I just want to extract 15.2 as well. So is that what on the agenda? >> Okay, perfect. Thank you so much. >> Okay, 15.2.2 will be held because we now have a delegation for it and I will go to you first. Okay. Anybody else want to hold anything else? Seeing none, I need a motion to adopt those items. Councelor Leu, Councelor Thompson, all those in favor opposed. That carries. Thank you very much. All right, we have no public hearings today, but we do have a special guest uh in the audience. Um Carmine Stumpo, who's the president and CEO of McKenzie Health. And if anybody kind of smells that new car smell, it's because he's still relatively new in the in the role. Um, and so, uh, Carmine, welcome to re, uh, Richmond Hill Council for your first presentation of your career. So, make it a good one. >> Thank you, Mayor West. No pressure there. >> I appreciate it. Uh, thank you for the invitation, Mayor West, Council, it's a pleasure to be here. As stated, uh, I'm Carmen Stumple, president, CEO at Mackenzie Health. I've been with the organization for one and a half months. So, in that early time, I've had the privilege actually of interacting with Mayor West on multiple occasions, most recently with the uh uh breakfast prayer uh prayer breakfast. And uh I want to thank you for your warm welcome and and your support in my transition into the community. I also want to start by acknowledging previous leadership, Altaf, Station Walla, and Mary Agnes Wilson. Uh they've done a remarkable job creating an incredible health system that I have the privilege uh of working with. So um for them I am I'm grateful. What I'd like to do is provide a brief presentation uh looking at a little bit about who we are, a reminder of who we are, some of our challenges uh but not to dwell on our challenges to to look at our challenges as opportunities uh and successes as well as provide some insight as to where we are advocating going into the future uh for future community needs. So, um, as you know, uh, McKenzie Health is an incredible two hospital system, plus community- based resources, uh, urgent care clinics, uh, behavioral support clinics. Uh, we are anchored by the Corduchon Hospital and the Richmond Hill Hospital, both of which serve our communities uh, incredibly well. Uh, a fantastic model of core services located at both sites. So you have your emergency medicine, critical care, medical surgical supports at both and now more recently mental health services at both sites including Richmond Hill over the last year uh which is phenomenal uh general community medicine uh availability as well as we have a a unique blend of specialized services distributed amongst the hospitals. Uh so that would include obstetrics at Corduchon and and kidney disease treatment at Richmond Hill. That allows us to create expertise to really hone the craft of medicine at those individual sites and allows uh our teams to work seamlessly between organizations to ensure our communities receive the care they need close to home and have access to expert services when required. So um again I I reference this as an incredible model uh that with the community support services that exist uh has creates this hospital system. I'd like to get into a little bit of the numbers to share some of our success stories which also translate into some of our opportunities. Uh so uh the growth pattern that we've seen and and the growth we've witnessed with the expansion of our services is translated in the numbers before you I I won't go through them all but I I'll highlight several uh particular numbers. So um last fiscal year from April 1st to March 31st we saw 247,000 emergency visits. That's at the two hospital sites in the urgent care clinic. That translates to approximately 7 to 800 visits per day in those facilities. Now, that uh year-over-year trend is a 6% increase reflective not only of the growth of um our communities. We see intensification and and it's a direct reflect of that. However, we are also seeing that our populations are getting older and are living with more chronic diseases. Um those are both success stories. the fact that we are able to manage patients and and live longer healthier lives into um extended age. However, that also comes with increased demands of health services and we see that uh in in the hospital. On the other extreme, we we we've seen 4200 births uh which is a dramatic increase uh over historical values of less than 2500 births uh 5 years ago. We also see 15,000 surgical procedures. Again, growth in this area to meet the the needs and provide care and service closer to home. So, all these uh elements translate into an incredibly fast growing community and fast growing hospital. Uh I'll touch upon one area. When you look at 247,000 emergency department visits, a certain percentage of those individuals will require inpatient care. So they'll be admitted approximately 10 12%. Um we have seen that growth as well. And currently uh we typically see approximately 38 individuals waiting in the emergency department for access to an inpatient bed elsewhere in the hospital. This capacity need uh is uh well understood. Uh again part of our advocacy is how we grow with our communities includes not just the emergency department services but access to inpatient care. Where that gets magnified is in our surge seasons. So we have a very predictable annual respiratory season where individuals present to the emergency department at higher numbers and this past year was no exception. uh we saw respiratory seasons start earlier and more intensely than before in previous years. Uh we saw an increase of 156% of our respiratory cases in the hospital during that time. Now one might ask how does how do you manage uh that kind of surge translated to approximately at our peak uh 98 patients in emerge waiting for beds on impatient floors. Uh so uh I give all the credit to our teams and our leaders. Uh they get very creative in terms of where patients uh are housed. Uh they work extra hours. We extend clinics. Uh we we we get by each and every year. And this this is part of our planning. This is part of our surge response. Thankfully, it's not like that every year, but we do see the baseline increasing every year. So after every surge we we realize that our baseline activity goes up by that 6% and we continue to see that growth uh in the organization. When we consider that growth both of population and disease complexity um that creates a whole new challenge in terms of a financial burden u that and the fact that hospitals are not immune to the economic challenges that exist in the world today. So, so we have uh supply chain disruption, we have high inflationary costs. So, increase in demand of service, increase in cost per service brings us to a very tenuous financial situation. Uh Mackenzie Health is in a unique position this past year. We finished the year with a surplus. Uh and that's a credit to the team. That position is not anticipated to be sustainable. We know there's more demands coming. We know that that funding and it's it's not a criticism of anyone. Um the pace in which we are growing as a province is exceeding the current uh funding allocations. Uh and we need to do our part. So we are looking at the services we provide and how we can do so more efficiently. We want to maintain access to care but at at the same time be able to ensure that we are operating uh in the most uh effective way for safe and effective highquality care. And that's something that we are all looking at across the board and and McKenzie is absolutely no exception there. So those are some of the challenges and and again I don't want to dwell on the challenges. Those are our realities and we're going to work through those. However, uh last year we approved or we just had our one-year anniversary of our new strategic plan and this plan guides us to where we are going into the future and and I want to spend some time to talk about different elements of our strategy. So uh it is all based and centered around excellence in patient care. That is our primary focus. That includes providing safe care. We've invested in our teams to enhance the safety and the reliability, reducing the number of of serious uh events within the organization and we continue to look at how we deliver that care uh in the best possible manner. We also recognize that people are a key element of our strategy. Uh we all know the health human resource crisis that was uh created in the pandemic and the health human resource crisis of opening up a net new second hospital and uh we've overcome many challenges there and continue to look for ways to grow and develop our team. Uh Deputy Mayor Chan you referenced care of seniors uh that that is something that we need to do in an integrated manner. It takes a village to look after seniors and that is a priority of ours is how we integrate care across the entire continuum. It's not just about the hospital. It's about how we relate to primary care to community parame medicine to public health to all the support services that exist in the community and we are looking at how we can through partnership as well as through service delivery improve the health and well-being of our community through integrated care. We also have a really unique opportunity in education and research. We embark we are well known in in education when it comes to nursing education. We have hundreds of nurses coming through our organizations on any given year. We are now venturing into physician education with the opening of the York School of Medicine. That is a transformative project for us. When you have a full breadth of e academic services with a within a facility, it absolutely elevates the game of everyone. It will improve quality. Uh it will give us opportunities for the latest and greatest in in terms of best practices and it allow our our current excellent physicians to have that one extra uh element of training and education to to to bring them to their top performance. So we're very excited about um education and research. Finally, uh we have a strategy around growing with our community. It is important that as uh as uh housing targets and and intensification increases that we are able to respond in the same way. And that that reflects not only the volume of service we provide but also the breadth and depth of service we provide. And when we look at that uh we have several new services in the last year that have been provided. And I also want to acknowledge again in Richmond Hill, we've we've added the mental health services, impatient beds to the Richmond Hill site, which was a much needed addition uh to to that hospital site. There's a number of services here. I'll highlight a few as they relate. um when you see increasing numbers in the emergency department, the proportion of those visits that are cardiac in nature increase and you create a critical mass where it just makes more sense to deliver more cardiac services locally versus transferring out. So, uh this past year we have a relationship with South Lake Health uh to uh venture into a cardiac care relationship to be a center of excellence for cardiac care. It starts slowly. starts with access to pacemaker clinics, but there's a progression there where we will continue to add service to meet the needs of our community that will grow and expand. So, we're really excited to be able to introduce new services within the organization. Not only is it important to uh introduce new services, it's also important to expand current services. So our kidney disease program based out of Richmond Hill um we have seen the opening of a new site in Markham and that is important because uh with our distribution of services in Richmond Hill Oakges Markham uh von um and vaugh we see this network of kidney care where we're able to meet patients where they're at in a chronic disease that has uh significant u implications for multiple visits to hospital multiple visits to the clinic site on an ongoing basis. So we're able to grow that dimension of care uh across the region uh through um growth and development of that program which we're very proud of. So growth of our services we have a medium and long-term plan as well that we continue to work through. And the first I'll highlight uh when we built the corduchi von hospital five year opened it 5 years ago. Uh the 9th and 10th floors remain essentially empty. Uh they're the shelled space. They can accommodate its 116,000 square feet and potential for 149 extra beds. So, we are working very closely uh with the province to release access to funds to enable those beds to occur. And thank you, Mayor West again for your support and advocacy to the premier to enable these beds to open. Um not only will they serve that hospital, these are regional beds. They will help us decant the volumes across Cordeluchon, across Richmond Hill Hospital and some of our neighboring hospitals. So that is a muchneeded boost in capacity that we are hopeful that we will continue to work with the ministry to be able to release this capacity and enable uh ourselves to deliver uh care outside of what what we've already mentioned in terms of the um patients waiting in the emergency department. I call that the intermediate or medium-term strategy. We have a long-term strategy. If you drive by Richmond Hill site, I think everyone here will know uh it's a 60-y old facility. There's a lot of scaffolding and hoarding up right now. Um we have done a lot of investment in Richmond Hill to bring it um up to uh better standards, both cosmetic investments, but also infrastructure. We just recently included uh a new generator to ensure reliability and service to the hospital. uh we recognize that those fixes are essential but not the end uh of the story. We are working towards a redevelopment plan to look to modernize this entire facility. Uh that process takes a long time and we've started in earnest to ensure that we can get uh the right facility in the right place at the right time. So we are working diligently on this again anticipating the growth within our communities and ensuring that we are able to match pace So other highlights uh thank you all very much. I know for the first time just before I started I was able to participate in the spotlight event. Our foundation uh was uh very successful in in launching the foundation. So uh it was great to see uh Mayor West, Deputy Mayor Chan uh present as well. Uh councelor Leu and uh uh councelor Chu was also present at that event. Uh it was a remarkable $650,000 raised and really set the stage for the return of a gala event to uh McKenzie Health. On the right several weeks ago, we were able to host Strides for Mckenzie Health. Again, councelor Chu was also a participant in that race. Uh it was fantastic. We we broke our record in terms of number of participants over 2,000. We raised over $460,000 which was incredible. And as Mayor West knows, the most important statistic in this was I was able to finish ahead of my 24 year old son in the 5K run. And make no mistake about it, he was trying. >> He was he was trying. >> We'll talk. >> We'll talk. Okay. So again, what a great event. Uh and later this year in the fall, September 27th, we'll have our ride for Mackenzie Health. Uh great ways to bring community together, great ways to promote health with active events, great ways to support uh the local environment. Uh I I know at Strides people were were present uh afterwards and lingered around at Ride. I understand it's a beautiful ride through uh some of the re uh part of the region, which uh I'm looking forward to as well. So I encourage everyone to participate in that. So with that, I hope I was able to provide an update, a balanced view of uh where we are at uh after this year, our our focus, some of our challenges, but also our opportunities, our priorities, and where we hope to be uh going into the future. Again, Mayor West, thank you so much for the opportunity. I really look forward to working with you and council as we go forwards. >> No, thank you very much, Carmen. I really appreciate that. and uh you know welcome to uh the job and uh and also welcome to Richmond Hill and and the great work that you do. So thank you. So um we'll we need a motion to receive this and any discussion. So uh regional local counselor Chan go ahead. >> Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you very much. Could I say still Mr. new president seal comment se three times uh in the last seven days right and um thank you and also your team of course the presentation um although it's the second time I see this uh presentation last week at uh the York region um but it's I'm seeing something that prompts me to uh number one thank you for the work of the team and notwithstanding you only uh been at this particular job position for six weeks you're talking about spotlight and all these activities is going on. So I guess the other side is the foundation right which might not be on the slide but I also want to acknowledge uh because that's really connecting the committee that bring in the much needed that nonfunded uh uh revenues for programs and talking about programs I know that one of the slides you mentioned about you mention emergency uh department visits um well I'm really looking at the mental health output visits for almost 42,000 um as you're probably aware of um with the um Canadian Mental Health Association, the York Simco branch is actually starting up to have this um 247 York Region mental health center. I know it's not based in Vaughn or Richmond Hill. So I wonder looking ahead is that any plans maybe collaborating with that particular mental health centers supposed to serve all of York region through you Mr. Chair. Uh thank you uh deputy mayor and and through the chair. U just to address your first comment absolutely uh the work of the Mackenzie Health Foundation is uh immeasurable in terms of raising funds uh for both equipment and in our campaigns and and I I do uh uh want to acknowledge all their work and their participation in in their events. Um when we look at how we participate with uh CHA as you've uh referenced um there's a number of levels where we participate. We we deliver services, we deliver outpatient services ourselves and it's important that we navigate with CHA. Uh where I see the opportunity and what's part of our strategy under integrated care is through the uh West York on West York Region Ontario health team. So this is a collection of all the providers including CHA, including the hospital, family doctors, nurse practitioners, a large variety of individuals that are responsible for mental health and it's through that collaboration I think we can achieve gains. U it's not simply a point in in time for patients. Sometimes patients need uh acute care services but more often they need supports at home and how we deliver those supports is always through the community agencies and how we can work together and help each other be more successful is a key priority. >> Thank you. Um this particular question I'm not sure um I'm open up a can of worms but um as we all know at particular healthcare the bill 60 used to be called bill 60 is now in effect. So um there are um other types of healthcare institutions uh actually being established all around. Um so to the extent that you can help us to uh have a better understanding um how that might be monitored uh because we only have so many physicians, we have only so many surgeons at this point in time. Um so any particular insight that could be shared with us the broader community be great. If there's something still not quite appropriate at this point in time to bring up and do let us know through Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Through the chair um we recognize those all forms of u of delivery of service and and I I believe what you're referring to are some of the community based surgical ambulatory clinics and in particular potentially uh the Schroeder ambulatory clinic. um our primary driver is the care of our patients. So we need to work together to make sure that patients have the right level of care at the right time and and sometimes that's within a hospital and sometimes it's not and and the clinics uh our our position is we we want to work with we want to identify the right role for all the different uh organizations and and how we can help each other because there will be circumstances where we absolutely need to work together. So, so that is uh my priority u to continue the relationships, the wellestablished relationships with all the clinics that exist. Um and it's it's less about compliance and more about partnership. How do we work together to ensure we're all being effective? That is the approach we're going to take. Uh and of course working within our scopes. So, nobody should be doing anything outside of what they're capable of, hospitals included. >> Yeah. Uh the last Thank you for that. and um we'll see what happens as the world unfold so to speak. The last um question through Mr. Chair is that one of the slides talking about connecting the community holding hands and recognizing uh Richmond well not just Richmond Hill York region or GTA for that matter is a very diverse community. So to what extent that um I guess efforts have been done or are plans maybe uh in the works in terms of reaching out to uh non-English um speaking reading community in our York region or Richmond Hill. So Mr. Chair, >> thank you through the chair. Um diversity, equity, inclusion in general sense is part of our priority. Uh you you will find that under people are our strength. uh and we want to uh embrace the philosophy of of of that diversity and that is not limited um to cultural diversity or language diversity. Uh it includes indigenous peoples that uh we are committed to uh both providing access to but also acknowledging there's different forms of of health practices that we need to embrace. Uh and that's something that is an active part of our strategy uh and part of our outreach. So, uh, one of the beauties of, uh, reaching out to councils is the opportunity to identify other places that perhaps are more difficult to reach. Uh, part of our equity plan is to make extra effort where effort is required and we're happy to to do the outreach as well. >> Thank you very much for answers. Um, and Mr. Chair, uh, I will be happily move the motion to receive the presentation with thanks. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Davidson. you'll be willing to second that. >> Okay. >> Thank you. And hello. I'm Carol from W one way up in O Bridges. Welcome. Um I have a couple of questions. One is um I see some of the things we're doing here back not so long ago if you had a heart issue or a kidney issue, you would think you have to go down to University Avenue. Can you talk about how local hospitals are starting to make it easier for patients to not have to make that trek? >> Okay. So through the chair, um my simplest message to our local community is uh no door is the wrong door. If you have an emergency, go to the nearest hospital. That is our job to sort out what the right level of care is and what we're capable of and we will direct from there. In an emergency situation where it's less emergent and we can plan it, we will work with our partners. So healthcare is very much a regionalbased partnership based model. Um as a hospital we provide the core services again without getting into the details of what they are but you referenced cardiac is a great example. Um we do have cardiac diagnostics we do have um heart function clinics. We do have various services that can serve um a wide population of cardiac needs. And more recently we have what's called a pacemaker clinic. So ongoing uh management of pacemakers in partnership with South Lake would be uh well within our capabilities. So as as you develop critical mass because that's important. You have to do enough of something to get really good at it and you have to do enough of something to be able to staff it in a way that's it's accessible. Um it's not helpful to provide an urgent service a couple of days a week. You need to be able to provide call coverage, etc. So we we look at all that. We look at the population needs. We look at how um how much volume is required, what our skill set is and what it would take. And we're also guided by Ontario Health. There are standards and guidelines that help us define at what level are you ready to proceed. So those are all the elements that come into play that define whether we can provide the care in the hospital or whether we need to transfer out. And we will always have an element of transferring out. That's uh and that's how good systems are designed. So uh I use the example in extreme situations of brain surgery. We will never provide brain surgery. Uh that is something that you want a very few select hospitals to do and that's um and then there's a wide range of services in between. Uh I reference that to say um it's it's a real uh opportunity to keep evaluating based on what our population needs are and that shifts over time and then we respond by creating those services. >> Thank you. Um and through you Mr. Chair, um there's been a bit of press lately about u measles in the emergency. Can you explain how that could happen? what the protocols are or what's being done about it and what the general risk to the public is when something like that gets gets out. >> So through the chair I I think the first message there is the absolute critical nature of vaccines. Uh we are in this position because of lapses and gaps in vaccines and that's something that I think we can address up front. Um so I can describe a scenario. It may not be exactly the scenario. However, we have protocols in our emergency departments where we screen for febal illness. We screen for symptoms. Uh when we identify that um very difficult to control where they where individuals were ahead of time. So we work very closely with public health. So we work with public health to be able to do tracing back and uh we do our public duty to ensure making announcements if you are present you were close that's sort of the announcements you get is by tracing back. So we do actively look um in any infectious disease. We update our screens at the emergency department, but that doesn't prevent us um uh that doesn't always prevent exposures if people were present previously. So that's that's where we work with public health to ensure that um they are able to do their jobs effectively, which is contact tracing all the way back to ensure that it's contained. and and again that becomes more relevant as new infectious diseases emerge and we will continue to work. I think the key message there is our relationship with public health is incredibly important for that. >> Thank you. And um I guess it's obvious to you, Mr. Chair, that transparency and openness is is the name of the game, right? Right. And I completely with you on vaccines 100%. Um, so we know healthcare is a provincial matter for the most part, but what is something you would like to ask of the municipality of Richmond Hill, all of us sitting here, what is something we could do to help improve whatever McKenzie Health and uh, Von Hospital are doing? >> So, there's a couple of different things. Uh, a we we appreciate your support and advocacy. We're all trying to make our communities as healthy as possible. Uh, so that's the first, and I think that's that should not be understated. In terms of directly health, when you look at um what defines health in a population, hospital care is actually not the highest. It's the social determinance of health. It's um some people need a meal more than they need a doctor. Some people need a house more than they need a nurse. And how we work together, and that's through the Ontario health teams, how we work together to ensure that we're meeting all the needs of our community in a seamless way. At times it'll be acute care and it'll be the hospital and we need to work for that. Um but if we go back to the cardiac example, treatment of a heart attack is about two and a half days. What's more important is the 20 years before and the 20 years after. So that's how we can work together. And there's so many things as a municipality, as a region that impact health and wellness, food security, housing, access to uh um health facilities, all those things are absolutely critical and they're all intertwined. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much, uh Council Tree. >> Okay. Uh thank you so much, uh Mr. Chair and uh Mayor as well. So thank you. for our new CEO KM coming to the city of Bishaf. Unfortunately, today cannot go in the office to see you in person. But I really appreciate all the efforts uh you have done in the past few months or few years maybe no few months obviously we have the chance to meet each other. I really pleasure to work with you and see a lot of excellent news excellent working efforts from entire hospital from our house system as well. So as a member of the threat committee also writing committees I'm looking for more opportunities to promote our fundraising event across entire region I hope more entrepreneurs donors can come here to support our uh hospitals and our public health and looking forward to have more chance to work with you together. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much councelor Silvitz. Oh, thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Carmine. Welcome to Council Chambers. Pleasure to welcome you here, and it was really a pleasure to share a table with you at the at the prayer with prayer breakfast. So, uh very very nice to meet you and you do have shoes to fill, but I am quite confident that you have already filled them very well. Um I wanted to mention also your urgent care clinic on Jane Street which I think is a very very important part of um the triad as far as I'm concerned that um that serves serves all of us and I've been there so many times family members and the service there is superb. So, I just wanted to mention that as well because um it's it's it's part of the McKenzie Health um uh family and very very important. I think it's it serves um it serves a it serves an amazing opportunity for uh these two hospitals to not always have everybody coming into the ED. They can go to that urgent care clinic and the care is superb. So, I just wanted to mention that as well. And on a personal note, I was um I I had to be seen a few weeks ago with a recurrent lower back problem and and I I was at Cordaluchcci and the care was remarkable. Absolutely remarkable. From the moment I walked in uh to everywhere um where each little department, each little place that I was seen, the care was superb. The attending physician, the nurses, the technicians, um I can't say enough. and then the post care as well uh what h what had to be done afterwards and followup and all of that. So uh from that personal perspective um thank you for everything that uh McKenzie Health does um superb superb um service um I wanted to ask you with um the new hospital that's being built in East Gillimberry. So I don't know how much you you can actually speak to that but I would imagine that that hospital is going to become an integral part of this York Region network of hospitals. Mackenzie Health Richard Hill Cordaluchcci um South Lake Mark Stoville um and I I I was just wondering if you could speak to that just a bit uh to let us know um what's what's happening there through you Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Through the chair. uh thank you very much and for your earlier comments. I will make sure to pass along uh the uh the sentiments to our team. I appreciate that. U so you've highlighted a very u a great opportunity for the region and we have three hospital systems within the region uh each of which are multiple sited. So we have Oak Valley with Markham Stoville and Oxbridge. We have uh South Lake with the main site on Davis Drive but now in Oxbridge um in East Willenberry and ourselves with the multiple sites. So uh as as leaders as teams we work together to identify how do we best distribute services. So again all of us provide the core services that you would see at any uh comm community large community hospital and um for example South Lake has the regional cancer program and the regional cardiac program. Well, we provide cancer services too. It's not just there, but we have to identify how do we best interact for the various uh forms of regional services. And with the addition of the new site, um I don't have all the details as of yet, but I can share with you there was some planning done early days in terms of how we work together uh through the ministry of health and through Ontario Health. We do regional planning so that uh there is a sense of who's doing what and the capacity is being built uh in a meaningful way and we work closely together. Uh and I'll reference the cardiac example again. Um all of that is with South Lake. I believe their more intense uh specialty services will remain at Davis Drive and what they'll be looking to do at their uh second site once they build is an expansion of capacity uh to cover their entire geography. So we will continue to work together. the hospital's probably eight years out uh if not more. So, as they continue to grow and develop, we will continue to share uh time and space to identify how we can best serve this region. >> Thank you. Um that's that's very interesting. I I also wanted to ask you through m through through you, Mr. Chair, a little bit more about those two flaws that have yet to come into um into operation. I didn't know that. And um I know that I am forever I and my family families are forever in Mackenzie Health's debt because in 2021 you literally saved the life of my husband not once but twice during the co pandemic. Once at McKenzie Health at emergency and then again when he crashed uh 10 days later at Cordeluchi. So um uh I I'm very interested to hear about those floors as to when they would be available, how many beds there would be there and um any any specific uh special specialties that will be uh that they will be seeing there. I would I would be just a little bit interested to hear about that because it it opens it up to you know to so many more patients through you Mr. Chair. through the chair. Um the the the two floors, it's actually quite dramatic when you walk through it. It's a wide open. It is when we we say it's a shelled space. It is concrete floors and walls. That's all that exists with some initial uh plumbing that's existing with gases and and and and utility. So part of the plan and part of the process the plan is there's approximately 149 beds that are available in that space. our clinical teams are just revisiting um what clinical scope will be in place. The last time we looked at it, it was right in the middle of the pandemic. So perhaps influenced by the pandemic needs, as you know, McKenzie played a leadership role in the province. Uh I watched that from afar uh in utter amazement to see how they now we responded at the time and um we're now revisiting that just to make sure it's the needs will be met. What we're seeing is right now the needs are for more general meds surgical supports. It it's it's the patients that are waiting in the emergency department that we really want to eliminate that from our existence and that's not just for us that exists at South Lake. It exists at Markham. So that'll be the key driver. The process is working through the ministry. So again it's um it's not as extensive as building a hospital from scratch. Uh but you still need to go through the process for capital approval and operating funds approval. Uh where we we think there's an opportunity is with a shel space you have a running start on the build. This is this is 2/3 3/arters of the way there. How do we get it across the finish line? So those are the discussions that we're having currently and how those beds relate to McKenzie Health both sites and how they relate to the region so that we can all the entire region will benefit from that build. That's amazing. Thank you very much. And and I know I know that we will. I I I can speak to Cordaluchi being a shell because it was when we went we were there in May of 21, the only thing that was open was the Tim Hortons, thank God, and the critical care units. And um uh it was it's very it's interesting now to walk through the hospital and see everything that has that has come from from that shell and um the amazing work that is that is done every single day and night at these both both of our hospitals. So um thank you very much um as always um I'm I'm in McKenzie Health's debt. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, anybody else? Okay. Well, I just I'll just add a couple of things. Um, so first of all, I I mean I I think I've stressed every time that a CEO from the hospital has come to council how incredibly important uh the hospital is to our community and to our region. Um, and you know, we have to remember in Richmond Hill that we do share that hospital with other uh municipalities as well and and that's a good thing. Um so I just four things. U first of all I be ha I'm happy to uh support the the expansion of the shelf floors and in in fact it is great that we have that capacity that extra capacity that was built into the system when we built that hospital knowing that we would need it. It was just a matter of time and you know it it's amazing how quickly that time comes. So, um, that that's something we'll I'll continue to be able to support because, you know, when we get better health care in southern York region, we get better health care for our community. Um, the York Medical School is really exciting and uh, while I must admit I was really not all that happy with the funding model that um, it's it's not completely being paid for by the provincial government, um, I was very supportive of that because I really think that the benefit that we're going to get from that medical school, particularly with the with regard to increased access to family health professionals and trainees, is going to make a big difference in our community. So, I'm I'm looking forward to that very very much. Um the the other thing is too, I also just wanted to reiterate the the and you'd mentioned this in your presentation, the addition of the additional um mental health beds in McKenzie Health there. that is really important for our community. And the statistic on mental health visits I also suspect is also due to some degree by the well first of all in the to the growth of the needs for mental health visits but also the fact that we have mental health beds now is facilitating the uh the the rise in the number of people that need help and are able to get help in in our community. So I think that's incredibly important. Um, and I guess the last thing I'll just mention is um I know that there are plans kind of on the horizon with uh with the future of the um the uh renovations and so on for the Mackenzie Health Richmond Hill site and I look forward to having discussions on how that site uh grows with the times and how it it uh improves and gets renovated to serve our community in the future because as I said I mean we are growing as a community southern York region is growing as a community. Um that hospital has been um you know a part of my life for my almost my entire life. I mean right from you know being me being a star hockey player and getting injured well star in my own mind anyway. Um and uh you know all the way up to taking care of my family members and uh you know having our child uh born there a number of years ago. Um and and and by the way, the Vaughn um site is also been a great addition and has has cared very very well for our family members as well as the Richmond Hill site. So this is great. I appreciate you coming and I look forward to uh to having lots more interactions with you and and good luck in your job and I I I really appreciate getting to know you over the last little while and I think you'll do great. So thanks very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. So we have a motion on the floor to receive with thanks. All those in favor opposed. That carries unanimously. Thank you very much everybody. Okay. So uh the next item on the agenda we have three delegations. The first one is Cheyenne Zer from Shared Tower Inc. uh regarding the radio communication and broadcasting antenna at 1124 Elgen Mills Road. Uh that's uh 15.3. Shine. You were here last week. So welcome back. Thanks very much. You've got uh 5 minutes to address council. >> Perfect. Good morning, mayor and council. Thank you again for having me this morning. Today, I want to be very clear about what the decision regarding the tower is and what it is not. Under the established federal and municipal framework, council's role is to determine whether or not we've completed the city's protocol. The decision before you is either concurrence or non-concurrence. There is no mechanism to defer the responsibility of that decision to the federal government and council should be making this decision and has an obligation to make that determination based on the merits of the application and whether we followed the required process. In this case, we have as outlined in staff's reports. We've demonstrated the technical need for the tower, completed the city's consultation process, and responded to the applicable questions. That is the framework that council itself has adopted in order to evaluate these applications fairly and consistently. I also want to clarify that we cannot simply place towers wherever we want. That is a common misconception that continues to circulate publicly, but it is simply not true. Before any application comes to council, we must identify a legitimate gap in the network, undertake technical analysis, consult with the municipality, assess alternative locations, and conduct public consultation. The need for this tower is not theoretical. There is an existing significant gap in the wireless network today. Staff have acknowledged it. Technical data has demonstrated it. and residents experience it. And with hundreds of new homes currently under construction and thousands planned for the area, the existing infrastructure will not withstand this growth. At the same time, development will continue to happen in the area. Infrastructure planning cannot be delayed based on the possibility of future residents who may eventually move into the area. The consultation requirements in this case that are established under the city's protocol have been satisfied and there must be a practical and reasonable endpoint in the process that are aligned with the federal uh recommendations and expectations. This is not merely a convenience issue about dropped calls or slower data speeds. This is fundamentally a public safety issue. Emergency services rely on wireless network every day. Residents rely on it to call 911, receive emergency responses and alerts, communicate during severe weather conditions, and access help when landlines are not available. Across Canada, we've already seen the consequences of inadequate wireless infrastructure. In British Columbia, a municipality issued non-concurrence to a tower following public opposition that was rooted in misinformation. Within months, one of those residents suffered a heart attack, attempting to drive himself to the hospital due to lack of coverage. Unfortunately, he did not survive. Council soon overturned that decision after that event. In Nova Scotia, gaps in the wireless network prevented some residents from receiving emergency evacuation notifications during the flash flooding. Because those alerts depended on the wireless network, residents, including children, did not survive that event. These are not abstract scenarios. These are real consequences directly tied to the network. I also want to briefly address the public input received on this application. Of all the people circulated on this proposal, including the councelor Leu's circulation, the opposition submitted came from a single resident who lives over a kilometer away from this tower. This resident has opposed numerous other applications, not only within the city of Richmond Hill, but across Ontario, including some of our other applications in other municipalities. Respectfully, we request that that should not be interpreted as a representative of the broader community. On the other side, we also received a comment in support from a local resident specifically identifying the major coverage gaps in the area. I would also like to ask that council recognize the broader regulatory landscape that is evolving around these decisions. ISED who is the federal authority is actively reviewing changes to the consultation framework because of growing concern that political pressures at the municipal level are creating unnecessary barriers to critical telecommunications infrastructure. The federal government increasingly recognizes that local opposition often based in misinformation rather than technical evidence cannot continue to jeopardize essential infrastructure and public safety. And that is exactly what this tower is, essential infrastructure for the area. We would never suggest that a growing community should operate without roads, water, electricity, or emergency services. And in 2026, reliable connectivity is the same is in the same category. Today's decision is not about whether every resident likes towers. The question before council is whether shared tower followed the established protocol. The answer is yes. A decision of concurrence would recognize the evidence that's been submitted, uphold the integrity of its own process, and support the safety and connectivity needs of both current and future residents. Thank you very much for your time this morning. >> Okay, thank you. Uh the next person is uh I think this is Joan Joyce Joyce Fox um regarding the same application. Okay, I I see you on screen. I I just need you to uh unmute yourself and uh you can get started. You've got five minutes to uh address council. >> Thank you. Good morning, Mayor West and council members. I am a longtime resident of Richmond Hill and a volunteer. I'm sorry, I'm getting a message here. No, you're you're okay. We can hear you just fine. >> Yeah. Uh, >> my presentation is to provide reasons for council to vote non-concurrence for shared towers file STC 0773. Next slide, please. Council is empowered by the federal government to decide concurrence or non-concurrence. No evidence of a gap in existing service, inadequate public consultation, and landowner York Region has not provided asurances. Next slide, please. ISET empowers LUAS and elected officials to determine concurrence or non-concurrence. Next slide. This diagram shows outcomes of a concurrence or non-concurrence decision. ISID provides a mechanism called the dispute resolution process if a proponent disagrees with a council's decision. Next slide. In an ISED's written responses to questions by an MP, ISED states, LUAS are best positioned to understand their community's needs and are involved in local consultation. Next slide. This proposed cell tower site has not been federally mandated. Next, next slide. Next slide, please. Thank you. Uh, that's not it. Sorry, we kind of skipped one. We need slide number seven, please. Uh, so I'm sorry. Yes. No gap in service is evident on coverage maps for this area. According to information provided on major telecommunication carriers websites. Next slide, please. Reasons why councils have voted non-concurrence. Public opposition. Cell tower unsightly and diminishes enjoyment of property. Location not suitable and health concerns. Please note city of Richmond Hill is on this list. Next slide, please. Inadequate public consultation. Will the new residents public notification by a cell will a new the new residents public notification be a cell tower appearing right in front of their right in front of their homes? Excuse me. Next slide, please. Share Tower not notice package showed outofdate oh I'm sorry share tower notice package showed outofdate photo representations of the area and artificially reduce the actual height of the tower which goes against I said CPC 2000 20003 coverage proliferation maps and a YH report provided by share tower have material redacted and it is unclear if these computerenerated scenarios actually represent this site. Request for information in Health Canada's measurement standard was not provided. Numerous questions submitted by a resident not adequately answered. Next slide, please. Study finds cell towers near homes drops property value 2.4 to 9.7%. Next slide, please. Shared Towers notice package appears to reference a Google Earth map photo from 2014. Next slide, please. Y report has redactions. Next slide, please. Report depicts radio frequency microwave radiation plume computer simulation at 2 m above rooftop level. This assumes singlestory dwellings. This development consists of two to four story houses. The tower is less than 30 mters for municipal workers. What would a tower collapse radius be for a 47.5 meter tower? Next slide, please. report depicts a radio frequency microwave plume computer simulation at 2 meters above ground and this could impact adults, children and pets. Next slide, please. Next slide. Oh, thank you. Uh Y references a Health Canada safety code 6 report which is based on a six-minute exposure and based only on overheating of body tissue by more than one degree. A cell tower is 247 ex Next slide please. Next. Thank you. The YH signature page is missing important information and has been redacted. Next slide, please. Thank you. According to Health Canada's own report on 5G, no human studies were identified that assessed endpoints such as cancer, ocular effects, reproductive system effects, impacts on the immune system, non-specific symptoms, or any other adverse health outcomes. Next slide, please. >> U Joyce, you're out of time, but are you close to wrapping up? >> I just have two slid. This is I just have three. I'll be really quick, please. >> All right. Um, thank you. There is ample evidence that if the proposed cell tower is installed and activated, people will be harmed. Next slide, please. The regional municipality of York didn't provide adequate answers to the questions of appropriate insurance coverage and assume assumed risk of litigation. And next slide, please. Shared Tower emphasized 120day completion process. A vote of non-concurrence could render that moot. Thank you, chair and council members, for your time and consideration. The appendices are provided for additional information. Thank you for your time. >> Okay. Thank you so much. And so we have one more delegate uh Michael Theodoris about 481 Major McKenzie Drive. And uh Mr. Theodoris, I see you online. So uh you are ready to go. You got five minutes to address council. >> Okay. Uh you guys can hear. Okay. >> Yeah. No, no problem at all. >> Okay. Thanks, Mayor and members of council. I'm actually uh just speaking to two submissions I provided. uh last uh week and also uh yesterday regarding the uh latest uh recommendation from the planning uh division on a highdensity uh condo on Norfolk Avenue. So I just want to first of all address some concerns I had with the notification of this meeting from last week. Um I was actually shocked when I was going through on my own proactively the uh agenda for May 19th and noted that this actually was coming before council. So, I actually reached out to uh council and uh my w five counselor uh councelor Silvitz actually pushed that to this week. So, I'm glad we had a chance here. But I do have a concern about the notification process as it evolves and especially when it goes to the OOLT stage. I feel that if uh residents are actually involved in the process from the get-go, they should continue to have a chance to be informed by the city about uh upcoming council meetings, including a decision like this one uh for that is actually may bypass the OOLT hearing in July. It's been mentioned a few times that it's actually the clerk's office duty, but I actually think this should actually from council. I think there's got to be I feel like the planning process actually is broken right now. I think residents if they take the time to express uh interest in a particular project at the early stage, they should get at least a courtesy email as it evolves. And that was just sent out actually last week uh thanks to my counselor, but it's not really fair. I don't think there's actually six people that were listed as uh participants in the OOLT file. I'm one of them. And yet we didn't uh receive any uh notification for last week's meeting. Going into the actual uh recommendation from planning staff, I have still concerns regarding the height and density of the project. If you go to uh my first submission of May 19th, I talk about how it's still very high, 11 and 14 stories, very dense. The FSI is I think 3.82 compared to 2.0. And I also have a lot of concern with the actual density uh of the project. Like if you look at the staff report of May 20th on page 11, it's talking about the maximum GFA being 382% the maximum density 530 units per hectare. It's it's being planned for about 261 units there. If you did like a round about let's say two people per unit, you're talking about 500 people on a half acre lot, which is like 500 people for a hectare. Now, when I went through the actual planning process for the new official plan, they were talking about 150 people per hectare jobs and people with it more being concentrated right near the GO station. This is actually blocks away from from the GO station. So, we're hitting a very high density in an area that's not well served by YRT Transit or the GO train. Within my submission on May 19th, once again, I included the GO schedule that shows the service is terrible on the corridor. There's only four morning uh uh trips uh downtown, five on the rebound in the early afternoon, evening. So, it's not your true really uh PMTSA really compared to other ones like I showed you actually the schedule for Rutherford which actually only has 100 people per hector jobs and it's got superior uh all day service and also on weekends and holidays which Richmond does not have. Now, I included in my May 19th one actually an article with uh uh uh the mayor now, David West, formerly Ward 4 counselor, where he talked about the link between growth and infrastructure, including transit, and this station has not kept up with the times compared to other corridors. Now, I noticed actually uh uh mayor's uh uh social media post last week concerned about the delay in the uh York Region North Subway extension, and I caught a couple of comments. actually included in my May uh 20th submission where people are actually talking about the poor go service. They your your subject was actually the uh subway extension and people kind of chimed in and I talked about the poor service and maybe we should have been looking at that before like we were talking about and what caught my eye was actually two actually comments. one from the York Region Environmental Alliance that talked about that and another one from climate action Richmond Hill talked about intensification without the transportation infrastructure and essential service will it will be indeed unsustainable. It also affects the long-term quality of life of residents. I think uh this uh current uh recommendation uh needs more work. the uh the hearing was scheduled for mid July. So there's still plenty of time for staff to actually uh continue to discuss with the uh development of the project, get the density more in line with the area it's projected for, keeping in mind the actual infrastructure that uh the go train provides. Looks like I run out of time. So thanks for your time. >> Okay. Thank you very much. All right. So that Oh, sorry. We have one more uh uh delegate that we added. um Mike Lasion and it is for the uh 15.2.2 which is the uh the traffic change bylaw. So Mike, if you want to come on up and my apologies if I said your name wrong. I would welcome a correction. >> Just want to take the opportunity to thank uh David and the council members for allowing me to talk today. Uh my name is Mike Lasan. I have been a resident of Bayard's Lane for more than 30 years. Uh when I got the letter from the from the uh from the city regarding the proposed change on Bayart's lane, I kind of put it aside and I thought, well, let me think about this for a few days and some of the I only have a couple comments. The first I don't think it's a good idea. That's the first thing. There's never been a problem over 30 years. Now all of a sudden you're going to make this change and you got to think about it. Okay, I'm going to put the parking all on one side. So, what what does that do? When you put the cars all on one side, especially the side where children are walking home from school, what's going to happen is all those cars are going to be lined up. Hopefully, not too many. The child wants to cross the street. And I know you can tell your child, you know, like I had have three kids, don't, you know, cross the street between parked cars. It's going to happen. And you're going to court with disaster there. I I I personally witnessed a child being hit when I lived in Hamilton. Okay. And that walked out between parked cars. And it's it it's it it it's it's terrifying. And I and today the difference today too is that on our street on Bayards, like many of the other streets in Richmond Hill, you have 15 or 20 delivery trucks coming up and down the street. Just think about it. Car's parked all at one side, delivery truck comes up and he's in a hurry to get to his next spot. What happens? Disaster. So, I I I think it's a bad idea. I think you you're you want to you don't want to go with this change. Just leave it the way it is. Now, as far as the emergency vehicles, you got to think about it. Bayard's okay. I don't think I think the street is a little wider than the uh the bylaw there. But also two, you've got two ways in and out, two entrances to come in and out of the street. So if there's an emergency, emergency vehicles come in from two different two different routes. So you're not going to have that problem, I don't think. Um, finally, the final comment I have is if you're going to make this change on Bayard's, what happens to White Lodge? What happens to Cow's? All the other streets are the same. you're going to probably have to make the change in all those streets. I went over and took a look at Mil Pond. Same situation exists. So, you're going to you're going to have the same problem there. So, this is not and so my final comment is why is Bayard so special? How about all these other streets? Yeah. Basically, that's all that's all I wanted to say. I don't have too many other comments. If you have any questions of me because I've been there for 30 years, I more than happy to answer them. Thank you. >> Okay, we'll we'll come to this item in a minute, Mike, but thank you very much for coming. I we really appreciate that. So, you're going to have a seat and we'll uh we'll deal with this item in a few minutes. Okay. Um so, we uh now go to our agenda and uh I guess actually 1522 is the first item that we're going to be dealing with, right? Because it's numerically. So, I would uh uh send this over to reg sorry to councelor tree uh to get us kicked off and uh get a motion on the the table. Uh but go ahead councelor tree. >> Great. Thank you so much uh mayor. So um uh let's talk about 50.2 as well. So I'm going to move this motion to the table to for for discussion purpose. And meantime uh in the past one week I received many feedback from communities and also uh talk with our bot team also our traffic team and also I collect my information from my past builders regarding to this bayard street lanes as well. So uh I would uh recommended so this street should be removed from this year's traffic changes. So uh Mr. Clerk, can you please help me to bring a new motion on the table? Uh, is that possible? >> Okay. >> Okay, Mr. Clerk, go ahead. Um, thank you. Uh, through the chair, I I I would like to clarify with the counselor. Um when uh you began speaking you said you were moving the motion for discussion and now you're asking me to I believe bring forward a slightly different motion which would be amendment. Is that correct? >> Yeah that's correct. I won't make amendments here. >> So >> right. Um so thank you u through the chair. My advice is first we actually need a seconder on the main motion and then it would be open for you to move the amendment and I could bring forward that amendment. >> Can he not move the amended motion though? um through the chair he could uh but uh he did suggest he was moving the motion for discussion as is and so I I just think procedurally it's best >> if if you don't mind let's I'll have you move the the uh motion as it is and then we'll get a seconder on that and then if you want to amend the motion you can do that uh at that that's the idea Mr. clerk. Okay. Does that work for you, counselor? >> Yeah, that works for me. Thank you so much. >> Okay. Okay. Are are you have you got still comments to make? >> Uh, no. Uh, I think this is the so far in my work for this the only street bring lot of attentions from community. >> Okay, great. Thank you. So, I need a seconder for the staff recommendation then. Okay, councelor Shu. Okay. Did you want to speak to it? >> Uh yeah, sure. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor. Actually, I have one more location to discuss uh for the new traffic regulations. So, do I need to amend this amendment? >> No, this is not an amendment. The what's on the floor right now is the staff recommendation. >> Okay. >> We need a seconder for it. So, if you want to second it, that's fine. If you want to amend it, I would suggest that you wait y until uh somebody else. So, I need I'm still looking for a seconder for this. Okay. councelor syllabus, do you want to speak to this? >> Um, so not specifically, no. I support the staff recommendations and I thank staff. >> Okay. So, is there anybody else that wants to speak on the motion that we have in front of us? Okay. Seeing none, uh, I would go to a a second round and that would be councelor tree. And if you want to move an amendment on this round, then you're welcome to do so. Okay, thanks to that too. Perfect. >> Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor. So, uh, Mr. Clerk, can you help me to bring this new amendment on the screen? So, um, as we discussed before, so Bayar Street, Ala, we got lot of the oppositions from Rising. So, I want to make a modification or amendment here regarding to that street. Can you please bring that motion or amendment on the screen? >> Okay, Mr. Mr. Clerk, you've got an amendment that he's prepared. >> Um, uh, yes. Uh, thank you. Through the chair and to confirm with, uh, councelor Tree as previously discussed, and I thank you for contacting me, my office prior to this, uh, the recommendation would be to actually first refer one of the bylaws back to staff and then that bylaw would come back with your proposed change to remove uh, Bayern's Lane from that bylaw. Uh and uh for the benefit of council uh that was my office's recommendation because we generally don't like amending bylaws on the floor because that's prone to error. >> Great. Sure. Thank you so much. So um just uh one comment on this bylaw. So all this amendment. So if in future if we near any uh additional public meeting we will be scheduled or need more feedback from community I would like to maybe organize another event for meetings to discuss further but so far uh from the purpose of this meeting we're not drop off the all the regulations or changes on the street uh we're going to waiting for more informations or more sessions coming back later on so so far I would like to remove uh um the binar from this term from this agenda. >> Okay. So I need a seconder for that. >> Okay. Councelor Shu, you want to second that? >> Uh yes, actually. But uh actually I just want to put one more location to add one. >> Let's deal with this first and then I'll come back to you in a minute. So are you still willing to second this? >> Okay. All right. Uh and councelor, do you want to speak to this? Councelor Shu, do you want to speak to this at all? >> Uh, no. Okay. Okay. Councelor Davidson, >> thank you. Um, so this concerns me through you, Mr. Chair. I understand the the the objection of the resident, and I thank them for coming, but I don't know that it's good for the city to pick off things at council that someone doesn't like. If that was the case, I I have a long list of things that come into play. So I I I want to know is this amendment say Bayard's going back to staff to review and perhaps work with residents and work with the counselor or is this just outright we're taking it out of the list because I know that staff doesn't come with these recommendations lightly. They have a reason. So I don't want to maybe it's a huge safety reason that I can't say I'm an expert on Bayard right now but Mr. Clerk. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Um thank you through the chair. Uh it would be my advice that the motion as written and as discussed with the councelor is that staff would merely revise the bylaw, the proposed bylaw to remove the reference to Bayard's Lane and bring back that bylaw at a future council meeting without staff report for enactment. >> Uh through you, Mr. Chair, I don't want to make things complicated, but I would like to add for review. I don't know that we should just be striking it when none of us are the experts on why Boeard has this has this as a list. like I feel we're performing without a net. So I would like it to come go back part of this amendment say with councelor Tre's approval go back to staff to review Bayard's Lane because my experience with staff has been um they they are open to to to residential input and maybe there's a compromise here that doesn't just strike it. I I don't want to be deciding bylaws here. Exactly what you said. I I actually agree with you that that I I I'm not sure that I fully understand even the the rationale behind this at this point in time. I was going to ask some questions, but but even then I I don't think we're going to get all the answers in in a brief council meeting. I don't know whether the mover and the seconder would be willing to modify the motion to allow that. It is a significantly different emotion, so I'm not not really sure it's a friendly amendment. Um, but yeah. Anyway, >> I I guess what I'm asking, Council Tree, is can it say be removed and sent back to staff for reconsideration and then brought back? I mean, maybe nothing will change, but I feel like I don't know, >> but we need But what you're saying is that we need the information from staff as to what the details are >> and why they made that decision in the first place. >> Okay. So, councelor Tree and Counselor Shu, are we good with that change? Okay guys, you've had your opportunity. This is back to council now. Okay. So, councelor tree first of all with you. Are are you amendable to that change or >> um >> actually this motion I worked with both bylaw team also traffic team. So um traffic team we discuss a few few minutes and in person as well. So uh from traffic team perspective this strongest for this motion as well. So the all the motion has been sent to PE team for their comment. So I think I got feedback here all agree. So this the the one they agree to put forward. >> Okay. So you're you want to keep the motion as it is then? >> Yeah that's all right. >> Okay. Okay. So that's your input counselor but the motion is on the floor as it as it stands. So okay. Uh anybody else on the amendment then? Uh councelor Silvitz. >> Thank you Mr. chair. Um, and thank you, Council Tree, and thank you to, uh, our resident who stepped forward. Um, I through you, Mr. Chair, um, and I don't want to put our commission on the spot, but if I may, when something like this comes to council, and it's not often that these amend these these uh, revisions are made to parking, and another part of this was also speed. Um, can you just briefly lead us through the professional engineering process that you and your department go through in order to reach the decisions that are in this report that come to council and ask us for for your to uh uh uh vote on your recommendations. Sorry, my brain's fried. Go ahead. Sorry. Through you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. through the chair to councelor Silvitz and subjects to anything that c director suba can add um as noted in the report and we do this by annually every year it used to be annually we come twice a year for the simple reason of trying to uh respond to residents requests on a more timely basis so we don't have to waited a full cycle in another year before there can be implementation the requests come in our team does an analysis of the width of the roads the required width that emergency vehicles need which is approximately 6 meters clear area and while uh in respect of uh the resident's comments which I can understand it's been like this for a very long time it probably exists on a lot of other roads but once we get a request that comes in we're required to you know look at it a little bit more closely and if you do have cars parked on both sides and there is an emergency vehicle there is that possibility that emergency vehicle would not be able to get through. So, it's challenging uh from a lot of perspectives. We have one parts of communities that say this is something that we want. We respond to it and we respond to it from a technical perspective. We do the analysis and justify that uh parking restrictions uh could be implemented. However, understandably, uh in a lot of scenarios, there's another part of the community that may not be in favor. So, we would be okay to take this one location back if needed. and then have some more dialogue and review it a little bit further. Uh we're not suggesting at this point that we would completely uh strike down this location where we wanted to at least have everything else move forward and possibly take this location back for further discussion with the area residents and bring it back. The next report that would be scheduled for traffic regul regulations is tenatively slated for December of this year. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh Mr. Sappa, do you want to add anything to that? uh through the chair to councelor Sus. The only thing I would really add is that standards do change over time and likely that's to the uh deput's uh remarks. Uh I've been there for a long time. Why is it changing now? Things do change over time. We do have to address those issues when we do go out to the site and identify something isn't meeting standards today. >> That's that'd be the only thing I'd add. >> That's true. Thank you very much. I appreciate the comments from um our senior staff. Uh well given given the comments from our commissioner and that he would be um he is would be okay to review Bayard's I would say then that I would support this uh this particular amendment uh simply because uh because of that statement. Thank you. >> But that's not what the motion says. It it the motion as it's the amendment as it's written is to just cancel the So you're you're not voting for review. you're voting for cancelling it if you go with this. >> Thank you for correcting me on that. Uh you're absolutely right. And uh so I I could only support this if it's if it's stated that there must be a review for Bayernard's laid, not a complete cancellation of uh what has already been uh found in the recommendations. >> Okay. Uh, region local counselor Chan. >> Thank you. Um, Mr. Chair, um, I'm I'm wondering uh, this may be helpful. Um, because if this motion, assuming it's passed, that means it's not going to be the bylaw that council adopting later today. But would that be a opportunity that from STAR perspective 6 months from now or whenever the time is uh they reveal based on the current standard not 10 years ago not 20 years ago 30 years ago can bring back a report based on the assessment could bring back either this street or any other street in any part of the city. I'm just trying to find a way out of this. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> So, through the chair to uh the deputy mayor, any report that comes in December to talk to this item again will likely tell us the same story. The standards we reviewed against are the current standards. Um, so we're at your mercy to take direction from you on how you would like us to uh to deal with this, but my concern is if we came back in December, we would really just be maybe giving you a little bit more information as to how we got to this decision, but we wouldn't be changing our minds on this. >> Sorry to interrupt, but again, I I'm fine with that, but but the that's not what the motion says. The the motion says that we're we're not doing that particular item on the on that. We're not asking for a review given the wording of this particular motion. Mr. Clerk. >> Um, thank you uh through the chair. So, um, I would absolutely generally agree with that statement. However, I would say that this motion is limited to proposed bylaw 2726. So, that would not preclude staff at a future date bringing it back. It wouldn't prevent them on their own initiative. I I don't agree because I mean the thing is that if that's the standard then anything we pass can be like we we will never be making decisions. We're either doing it or we're not doing it. And the way that this mo motion is written with all due respect is that we're canceling it. So I think council can be confident that if this passes that there will it will be cancelled. If this doesn't pass it'll go through there. The way this motion is written there is no in between. So, so I just want to wrap up, Mr. Chair. Thank you for that. Um, yeah, I I I I listen attentively to the delegate. I I I understand where it's coming from. Uh, I'm just trying to see um that is a another alternative, but I concur um that we need to have a review come back if we're canceling anything. The mayor make a very good comment with uh you know, like we can take out everything on table one, two, and three, but what does that mean? um and and then we're not making any decision. So um I I have to say based on the clarification um without coming back for council for a second look uh council tree um I'm sorry I I have a hard time in supporting this as is. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Anybody else? >> Okay. Uh councelor Shu, you already spoke on the >> on this amendment. >> Yes. Yes. So, so yeah, you can't speak on this amendment because you've already spoken. >> Okay. >> Okay. Anybody else? >> Yeah, he's already spoken, too. All right. Uh, I need to ask a question which I I quite honestly think needed to be answered at the very beginning here and and to my knowledge was not. Um, it's it's been over a week now since I've read the report. Um, but can you refresh my memory as to like why why are we doing this particular amendment? Can you what's the what was the rationale for doing this? Is it strictly about emergency vehicles >> through the chair to Mayor West? It's not strictly emergency vehicles. It's one of the criteria that's used. There was a lot of uh inquiries from local residents who had issues with uh parking on the street and staff also responded to those requests, undertook their review, which includes uh the uh ability for emergency vehicles to access uh if cars would be parked on both sides and why the result was this particular parking restriction. >> Okay, fair enough. So, you're saying that there were a bunch of of residents that asked for this change. Okay. Um, I'm a little bit surprised that the and maybe the staff that did the analysis could explain this to me. I know Bayernards. I I know it well, but I'm surprised unless I and maybe I'm missing something, but why is there such a big issue with parking on that street? Because honestly, I don't think that street is like there's no school on that street. There's no park on that street. Why is there such a big like do people have more parties on Bayards than other is it the party street? I don't like what's the reason that we have so much parking on that street through the chair to Mayor West. I don't have the particular details on to as to why it might be uh an issue. We can certainly go back and subject to director if he has any information on that, but that's part of the reason that we would look at this a little more detail. uh not so much review but rather get a better sense from the community as to what the issues are before we make a final decision if that helps. >> Okay. All right. I I I guess the thing is I mean I would only as I I the caution that I have here is that we ask staff to do the analysis. They are the trained professionals in this. I do I've been on council long enough to know that the safety and functionality of our street are the two probably most important things that staff does when they look at this in a well educated and professional and thorough way. We ask staff to do that analysis as council and I don't think I've I've heard a a a reason that I that we wouldn't um pass this like everything else that's included in this bylaw to be honest. So, um I mean if if we're going to be sitting here micromanaging the staff, uh and and I would be at this point in time, uh I'm not like I'd be interested to know how many people on that street are quite happy about that um change and and have uh have asked for it to happen. And and I I'm not sure that I have that information fully in front of me either, but I but I you know, I do trust that the staff has done their due diligence on this. Is there any other anything you can add to that >> to the chair to Mayor West? Nothing further to add at this time. >> All right, Councelor Thompson, go ahead. >> Um, thank you. And I wasn't originally going to speak, but a comment that you just made uh um in regards to a reason. I thought I heard from the delegate that they they felt that we're putting the the non-parking on the wrong side that the I'm assuming if I got this correct it sounds like there's uh the sidewalk will be on the same side that they're going to put the parking on. in which case now if somebody's coming off that sidewalk to go across the street, they are now walking between parked cars. So I guess my question to to staff really is on that particular analysis um was you know I I don't know if you can actually speak to the determination here as to why parking was selected for that particular side of the street. through the chair to uh councelor Thompson. In this particular case, um what I heard from staff essentially is the inner the inner side of the road was selected because from a sighteline perspective, it's easier for traffic to move more fluidly around the outside curve, if you understand what I'm saying. On the inside, it's a little more difficult to visualize vehicles coming towards you. So typically they select the inside portion of the road as the no parking site and that that's consistent with most roads in this in this case. >> Okay. And uh I appreciate the answer. I'm not a professional. I'm I'm counting on uh you guys as the professionals to be able to balance that what what carries more weight and if that's what carries more weight then um I go with what the staff say. >> Okay. All right. So, I think we've exhausted our speakers list. So, we have an amendment on the floor. Uh, all those in favor. Okay. Councilor Tree. Okay. All those in favor? Okay. Those opposed. Okay. That uh is lost. So, councelor Shu, you would wanted to move another amendment. >> Yes. Uh, Mr. May I want to make an amendment for another locations for the uh 11.2.2 and can I just move it and go ahead. Yeah. >> Okay. Uh actually over the past two weeks I've received quite a few concerns from the parents about the proposed parking restriction on Blackmore Avenue between the Valameid and Ronaldo Ronaldo Avenue as well as a stopping restriction on the same street from 228 meters north of Ronaldo to Ronaldo Avenue. Um actually I planned to bring this up last week at the uh at the count meeting but at that time there were only a few inquiries but since then concerns have grown quite a bit especially from the parent group at Don Crest public school and you can see uh item 11 uh sorry 15.5 there's a correspondence from a parent leader for your reference and parents are good with existing restrict area but are strongly opposed to extending it further toward Valamet. The root c the root cause and main issue is simply the lack of school parking actually which forces parents to rely on nearby street parking during school peak hours. If the restriction are extended to validate, parents would be pushed even farther away, which raises safety concerns, especially in winter, snow buildup make things even more difficult. And the parents also point out a longlasting issue with the snow with the snow piling up in the school parking lot during the winter. They asked the school to clear it more consistently as it often takes up to a week before any actions to be taken. So um the parents have no choice but to park their car right outside the school and the nearby area. So because of this extending the parking restriction would actually make the situation worse rather than help address the problem. So uh there's a one more reference uh for my council colleagues. Uh the parenting group has launched a study over the past two weeks. The nearby 16 Avenue public school has over 60 60 parking spaces but Donress public school has only 47 which are also shared with with the daycare next to it. And also on top of that, the nearby Black Wall tennis pickle ball doom adds even more pressure on parking. As you may know, with a pickle ball growing in popularity, school parking spaces are sometimes used by facility users, which further reduce availability during school peak hours. So given all this, I do believe the new parking restriction on this section is not realistic and I would like to ask the city to exclude this section in the proposed parking restrictions. And I actually uh reached out to the uh traffic team for feedback this past weekend and was told our respond will be coming, but I haven't heard back as of this morning. There's no respond coming back. So uh I have no choice. So I actually I don't mean to put the staff in the spotlight. Uh that's not my intention, but I have no choice and I have to say sorry that I like to propose a motion to amend this uh staff report to remove this section from the report. So what I mentioned is uh for the staff report page six table two Blackmore Avenue from Valame to Ronaldo for parking restriction as well as the the proposed stopping restriction. So I just want to exclude this two parts from this sub report. >> Okay. Uh Mr. Clerk, how shall we handle that? >> Uh thank you uh uh to the chair. So it would be in my view inappropriate to try to amend a staff report because that's a staff recommendation. However, um certainly what I understand you are are are proposing that you don't want the change proposed changes to Blackmore Avenue. So essentially it would be the exact same motion to amend as the previous one >> is to amend to to send back bylaw 2726 and then it comes forward without that in it. That's literally the only amendment we did. >> Okay. Actually, I just want to refer back to staff because I want to give more rooms for the staff to reveal this parking restriction. There's a different motion as before because I want to give the staff more. So, I just want to put it on hold at at this moment and just reveal this. Yeah, >> thank you. Uh through the chair. So it that's an uh it's and I understand you want to refer the bylaw back for review. However, uh I believe the chair already ruled that that's kind of challenging. Uh because actually it would be my advice that if you actually want to review send this for review, you actually have to review the entire staff report. And the reason I say that is because clause B of the motion says that council is endorsing all the recommended changes in the report. This is a very the removing one street is a very discreet function and that's what you're proposing and that's why we're recommending that it would just be an amendment to the proposed bylaw. So, uh, what you're suggesting, I mean, I I I actually don't see a problem with sending it back to staff to review it, but I I mean, that is the right of the counselor, what and that was not what what was proposed in the last motion. we could send it back for re for review and and you know understand the details more but I don't also don't want to hold up the rest of the bylaw because there's a whole bunch of of of changes in there that we need to enact as quickly as possible so how do we how do we do that okay can I say something >> yeah go ahead and actually it's not fair to be mo to be a star report like is because this is omnibus. This is an omnibus star report to in to in to include everything location in in one star report is not fair to >> but that that's how that's how these staff reports are done though and and I mean and there's a functionality to that because it's it's a twice annual review and and uh vetting of changes to to uh road conditions that staff does. So, >> I'm not sure if we can that will change, but I get what you're saying. You have my permission. Yeah, this is why it's a good idea to talk to the clerk before you put in amendments whenever possible. But >> actually, I just want to settle down before the council meeting because I'm still waiting this fair enough. Yeah, I get it. Yeah. I that's why I don't understand. I agree with you. I don't know why we're Um, thank you. Uh, I apologize for the time it took to put this together. I was trying to decide how to best uh achieve what the council wanted while still moving forward with any changes in the other bylaw without really messing up the overall report. So I I believe what's before you is a proposed amendment that would send the current bylaw 2726 back to staff. Staff would bring that forward without including Blackmore Avenue on a future council agenda, but staff would still have the option to review parking restrictions on Blackmore Avenue in future parking reviews. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Actually, can I add one more? Because on the Blackmore Avenue, there's also the stopping restriction. I just want to put as well as stopping restriction as well as a parking restriction. >> Okay. Is that >> Yeah, there's also a stopping distribution >> in the start report page seven. >> Table three >> is a table three. Yeah, I believe it's through the chair to the council. I believe it's the same bylaw. Notwithstanding, uh, ultimately staff is in support of all the recommendations here that are brought forward. As a result of our technical response to resident inquiries, ultimately it's up to council to determine whether or not they want to include or exclude any of the locations that we've addressed. >> Okay. >> To support pedestrian traffic safety on municipal roads. Thank you. >> Yeah. So, can I just add uh also add on the uh D1 D1? Yeah. To further to further consider the proposed parking restriction and stopping restriction on Blackmore Avenue. >> Parking. >> Parking and stopping. Parking is stopping. Yep. Perfect. I'm good on this. Okay. Okay. All right. So, I need a seconder for that. Okay. Regional local counselor Chan. So, do you want to speak to it? >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I understand the mover correctly, and that's based on the understanding that I'm seconding this, this is basically not only talking about Blackmore, but the whole B that sent back to staff to come back. Is that correct for Mr. Chair? And is that for Mr. K is only pertaining to Blackmore if we're supporting this amendment and not sending the whole uh B recommendation to come back. Mr. Clerk, >> um thank you through the chair. Yes, certainly that that is what this would accomplish if this is passed on amendment and then passed as the main motion. What would happen is the entire other part of the staff recommendation remains in in place. The only difference is that council wouldn't be passing bylaw 2726 today. It would be at the next council meeting not including Blackmore Avenue. >> Thank you very much. And on that clarification, uh I have no asation whatsoever to second this. uh perhaps uh this is an opportunity for more consultation analysis. So um Mr. Chair, I'm seconding this motion in front of us or amendment I should say. Thank you. >> Okay. Um councelor Davidson. >> Thank you through Mr. Chair. Maybe I'm like thick but I don't understand the second part. place a revised 27-6 is that that deals with more than just Blackmore, doesn't it? So, how are we not throwing parts of this whole thing back? Like, I I don't And why does it say a future council? Why can't we pass every single thing except Blackmore today? >> Mr. Clark. >> Um, thank you through the chair. And it's a great it's a great question. Um, yes. This would actually delay the passing of bylaw 2726. The reason we do so is we actually don't ever recommend amending the actual bylaw on the fly. That's what we call this because the bylaw would actually get signed after this meeting and we don't want to make errors of having put the wrong line and and stuff. So we what this does is since bylaws are merely a legislative instrument to give effect to a council's decision. What this motion would do is it says okay you know council is deciding they're they don't want black avenue in the proposed bylaw. Staff will go back fix that bylaw and it'll end up in all likelihood on the very next council agenda to give legislative effect to the decision already passed. >> Thank you through Mr. Chair. Can I ask if we passed it as is, what is it, is it written in stone or could a member come back and put forward a motion to review Blackmore separately rather than dismantling the whole bylaw, we come back and try to amend the bylaw after we've passed it later on rather than holding the whole thing up. >> That is always council's right. So, I mean, that would be my preference rather than messing with it as we go because again, I'm not an expert on Blackmore either. So, I don't know what I'm voting for really. I'm going to I you know, I look at my I have to be honest. I look at my word and try to see if it works. So, I I would I I have a real problem passing this because it just feels like we're dissecting bylaws on the fly here at council. >> Uh, thank you. >> Mr. Clerk actually corrected a small error I just made. We always couldn't do that, but if it's a reconsideration, it would be a twothirds vote, but then again, after the end of this council term, it resets itself, so you wouldn't need a twothirds vote. Just on a technicality. Okay. Uh, >> oh, sorry. Since I still have it three, Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask the commissioner what his thoughts are on this. How much of a mess is this in terms of stopping things? like is this really going to be a big deal if we do this >> through the chair to councelor Davidson it is significantly more administratively challenging for obvious reasons this discussion taking place this morning is an example of that uh as stated previously uh staff and myself stand behind the recommendations before you ultimately uh up to uh council should they want to make alterations to the recommendations made uh by staff. >> Thank you. Um and through Mr. Chair, my last comment is there's a school very close to in my neighborhood that I see a lot and these no stopping and no parking actually, as much as it is inconvenience for some parents, it provides safe passage for kids that are walking. So, it's not just one-sided. The kids that walk, the kids that run out of the school and go in every direction, not having cars as an issue in front of the school is a safety measure. So, um, I'm really going to have to consider this. Thank you. >> Okay, Councelor Selitz. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, and thank you for all of this discussion and, um, the gentle uh, the gentleman who stepped forward to speak on the other matter. Um, I see your confusion. Um, I understand it. I understand it. Um, if we're confused, I can imagine how you must feel. So um as you know as an elected official we we must have regard for what our residents say. However, we have a bylaw that's been brought before us through ex through through consultation through through discussion and it's now in the hands of council. It was at committee of the whole a week ago and um I understand and I respect the uh I respect the changes that councelor Shu needs to uh would like to make here uh because of further information he has received between the time of committee of the whole and now. I perfectly understand that and I don't want to disregard um any of the concerns of um the parents or the residents who have uh who contacted councelor Shu but I I don't believe and maybe I'm wrong but it's my personal belief. I don't believe that if if Bayard's was refused, we look at Blackmore and that gets pushed aside. I just this is this is this is not the way council should be operating, I'm going to have to vote no on this in order to be uh completely in line with what I did with my vote in the with the first the first one. And um I I can't I apologize, but I cannot support this for those for those reasons. I I must be consistent in what I do. That's it. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Uh go ahead, Scott. Councelor Thompson. >> Um thank you very much. So, I'm I'm trying to balance all this together and make sure I understand everything correctly. So, the reason why we're not trying to amend clause B is because the bylaws were already prepared and we signed those right after and consequently we would have to go in and then amend those and this is where it could become messy and we could potentially mess it up for all the other things that are actually on that bylaw. Have I understood that correctly so far? >> Um, thank you through the chair. I think that's a fairly good description of the concerns that staff would have about, you know, amending bylaws on the fly is that, you know, we we just could make an error and we don't want to ever do that, especially in regulatory errors. So when we're talking about regulatory matters and they could be subject to things like administrative monetary penalties and stuff. So yeah, we just don't want to do that. >> Okay. So So fair enough. Thank you for the answer. Uh to to staff then that have prepared this report and and I thank staff for all the work that they've done to preparing this report. Um the things that I'm hearing particularly in in this particular case where there is a school and we've got the Blackmore Tennis Club and and so on and so forth. Um I wouldn't think that those are things that you or you know that the city actually has to concern itself with because those are properties we don't control. Like it would seem to me that the school board would be the one that would control whether they provide better provisions for drop off and pick up and things like that. If uh the parking if they wanted to increase parking or those types of things. I mean is that that's not really something we control per se. We can certainly try and collaborate with the other parties, but uh I'm, you know, correct me if I'm wrong. You're really looking at it from what is the the safety perspective of our residents that travel that sections of road. Am I correct in that analysis? >> Through the chair, councelor Thompson, you are correct. The municipality has a responsibility to govern the safety of the road within the right of way, the portion of the road that the city owns. And we do collaborate with our stake stakeholders where we can, and we have limited control over private property matters such as schools, >> right? So, it seems to me that we're trying to make some decisions here that other parties should be making decisions on. uh and for us we have to look at it from what is safety for our residents. So um I I can't support what I'm seeing here uh in front of us for an amendment. I would I would suggest that this goes back to the original main motion. That those are my comments. Thank you. >> Okay. Anybody else? Okay. I again I have a couple of questions since uh um why why are we what was the reason for us considering the changes that we're talking about here like like in the last situation we heard about people asking to have these changes made I presume that we had the same situation happened here or was this something different >> through the chair to Mayor West in the first instance with uh councelor tree in ward 4 uh he did inform form staff that >> No, no. I mean, sorry, that's not what I meant. I meant why like we we we're proposing some changes on Blackmore. What were the reasons that we are proposing those changes? What spurred that those changes to happen? >> I'll direct the question to uh Director Supa. >> Uh thank to to you uh Mr. Mayor. Uh it's the the same scenario exists here. the the uh origin of the complaint comes from a resident on the street and then staff acts accordingly using current standards to address whatever the issue is. >> Okay. So, we didn't just pick this out of the blue sky. There was a reason for it. Okay. >> Um does this do these changes and I I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this, but do these changes in uh improve safety andor the functionality of this street >> to you, Mr. Mayor? All the all these sorry all the suggestions that staff put forward 100% improve safety on the streets. >> Okay. And this is your uh educated opinion that the that if we make the changes that are contained here, we're the street is going to be safer for all road users including people like pedestrians. >> Those would be our professional opinions. Yes. >> Okay. Um Okay. The thing the thing is that I I hear all the time and I'm quite certain that all of us on council hear all the time is concerns about safety, road safety, pedestrian safety, cyclist safety, all road users safety, including car drivers. Um, this is the reason that a couple of years ago we put together the the TE-AS uh strategy, traffic safety and operations strategy. And the reason that we did that was that in the past the things that we were doing with regard to traffic were a little bit more oneoff than I was comfortable with. So now what we've done under this new uh way of doing things is we've tried to take a more um measured approach, a more uh uh an approach that that looks at all the factors through the lens of of traffic engineering professionals that know what they're doing. I mean, I do know I've been on council long enough that I I know enough about traffic engineering to be dangerous, but no more than that. And so, you know, this is this is the reason that we brought forward the expertise of our staff to do all this stuff. And, as I said earlier, if we're not going to listen to that expertise, we're going back to the where we where we were before where we're just whatever um we're just putting things in to respond to to things, but we're not looking at it from a educated and holistic point of view. I for one am not uh thrilled about that the way it was and I think we're doing a much much better job right now at fully vetting and making sure that the decisions that we make are are made in a with a very very careful lens. Um there are going to be decisions that we make on council that not everybody's going to like and that's that's a daily occurrence in in our life on council and today I honestly believe that this is this is what we're talking about. I'm quite certain that there will be people uh if we don't pass these amendments that are not going to be happy with us. But I I take comfort in knowing that we've vetted all of the information. We've made sure that all users are considered because nobody owns the street. Nobody owns a sidewalk. That's a street and sidewalk for everybody. And that's the important thing that I think we have to remember. So I'm not in favor of this like I wasn't in favor of the other one. I'm comfortable with what staff has brought forward. It's been well vetted. It's been carefully considered. And I think that that's the best way to go. And and to keep in mind that there is a process that we go through when we're doing this that, you know, that we do collect input. We do try to consider as much as possible to give us a a very whole um whole view when we're we're making these decisions. So, okay. So, I think that's it for the speakers list. We have an amendment on the table. >> Can I record vote? >> Yep. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh voting on the amendment by councelor Shu. Councelor Shu. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Councelor Silhouettes. >> Regrettably no. >> Thank you. Councelor Tree. >> Yes. Yes. Thank you. Region Local Councelor Depala. >> Yes. >> Mayor West. >> No. >> Thank you, Councelor Thompson. >> No. >> Thank you, Councelor Yu. Thank you, Councelor Davidson. >> Thank you. And regional local councelor Chan. >> That amendment fails to carry. Okay. So, we're back to the main motion. And uh I guess is we have it moved and seconded. So, is there any more discussion on the main motion? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor? Opposed? That carries unanimously. All right. Um, the next item, so we have we do have to take a lunch break pretty soon. Do you think we can get through the uh cell tower issue? >> Okay, let's let's go with that and then and then hopefully we can get through that and then we'll go. So, councelor Oh, sorry. Uh, and we've agreed to switch to cell tower and the other one. So, go ahead, councelor Leu. >> Thank you very much, uh, Mr. Mayor. I'll be very quick and thank you, um, councelor Silvis for your indulgence for, uh, letting the, uh, cell tower go first uh, because I have four audience uh, in the uh, yeah for for audience in in in the in in in the hall. So, um, I would like to deal with it before the lunch break. So, um, thank you very much for the delegation. Thank you once again, Cheyenne. uh and also you know staff um doing a great work. Um I did I promise I I I reached out to the developer um after the count meeting last week and I I I did reach out to them and they um said that the um closing date is in November. So they're not able to disclose the uh the homeowner list to me. So to me that one thing um that's very important. It's different from a vacant land. It's someone bought the land without knowing without being consulted about this cell tower. Um I understand, you know, great presentation and thank you Joyce and also Pact for for for their input. Um but uh at this moment I'm still frustrated. I'm not denying there might be a need of the tower, but I'm frustrated because of the federal government always putting this burden on municipal council. Um and I'm in disagreement uh with that and you know following the protocol um are meaningless. Um so what I'm trying what I'm do will do now or today is I am going to move to staff recommendation A and that's it which is to receive the report. Um thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you once again uh Darren and Matthew you know great work. Thank you for your patience Cheyenne. Um um I I I think that's the best I can do. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh I need a seconder for that. Okay. Region Local Counselor Chan, >> go ahead. >> Thank you. Um I I think this is something that I uh share with uh the mover local counselor is really frustrating uh all municipal council not just Richmond Hill putting on the spot because the question is on one hand we have no authority whatsoever uh in so far as relating to whether the uh cellular tower or telecomation u uh device is going to put up in our community. We are only limited to land use very limited and everything is confined under the current protocol uh uh any particular uh uh concern about that and in this particular case and it been talked about last Wednesday too because there is a subdivision yet to appear and and that's that's a really real challenge uh I for one I'm sure for uh local council and and us uh sitting on this side is that so the tower will be there before people actually move in and then and and and I have difficulty in um supporting that notwithstanding maybe from a star perspective all the technical aspect of the very limited parameters they given check and I think that there might be opportunity and I did it in the past is to voice the concern uh in addition to doing what's upon this motion today to the local uh federal member of parliament and I have no hesitation. I did it before all the way to the minister of industry but used to be called a short term the long name now to voice that concern. I have no I have no I have no issue in so far as I will be uh continue to advocate go directly to the federal government go directly to the minister uh he served all of us in Canadian and also uh federation of Canadian parties annual conference is coming up next week I certainly uh uh uh that to extend the opportunity I raised that issue about I mentioned last Wednesday the FCM and the Canadian Canadian wireless association launch protocol that the template for all of us in management party to use need to be revised and update and I'll continue to advocate for that but in the meantime before any changes happen um I support this motion where is the motion now >> we going to receive okay screen >> yes >> okay um thank you uh councelor Silvitz >> thank you I I support the the motion ju just to receive this and I echo the words Councelor Leu and and and Deputy Mayor Chen, we've all gone through this at some point with cell Towers and I know you find it as difficult as we do to have to come to council and to have these discussions when really it's it's the federal government that is in total control of this. So, um I want to thank Cheyenne for stepping forward today again and giving us a very very good presentation there. There were items in that presentation that you gave us that I weren't aware of. I wasn't aware of and now I am and that made a lot of things clearer to me. Um we have we have indeed we appear to have indeed uh ex pass the protocols. We've done that. It it seems that I don't I to me I understand what the resident was saying but to me when I look at this it doesn't look to me that that anything has been anything has been overlooked in a legitimate in a in a legitimate way. So I I'll support this to to receive it and um whatever happens in uh future forward is happens. Thank you. >> Okay, councelor Thompson. >> Uh thank you very much the chair. Just a couple of quick questions to staff. So, um, we're hearing that our obligation is basically city protocols, uh, around concurrence and non-concurrence. And in the delegates, uh, uh, presentation this morning, it talked about Richmond Hill back in April of uh, 2024 or five, I can't remember which year. There was a uh decision um at that time that went against the thing was do we know whether that had anything to do with non-concurrence >> through the chair to councelor Thompson. Uh since I've been here with the city, um I can confirm that none of our uh recommendations to council um for concurrence or non-concurrence have been as a result of protocol uh not uh not um adhering to the city's protocol. >> Okay. So >> without going >> we can't we can't validate what we saw in the presentation is what I'm hearing. No, I can get back to you uh with the details of the April 2025 uh report that addressed uh the cell tower at that time. I suspect it is the East Beaver Creek one uh that was in the just up the road here, but I can confirm the details for you and provide that to you. >> Okay. And and with that said, then I will support the uh um motion to receive. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, regional councelor depala. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I I I uh I I don't understand why we're only looking at a I mean, B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B is just to say that we acknowledge that um that a a consultation had been undertaken according to our city's protocol. I I don't see anyone arguing in a case that they did not follow our city's protocol and then that there are no land use planning issues. That's what our our recommendation is here. And you know, I I I want to go back and support that. I really I really don't know. I I didn't understand at the last meeting and I don't understand today why we're unable to just say that this uh that this uh Shared Tower Inc. is has performed a consultation. They've done so in according to the city's protocol and there's no land issue no land use planning issues. I haven't heard anything to the contrary. So, I' I' I'd like to move a motion, if there's a seconder, that we also um amend the motion on the floor to also include items B and C. >> I I don't think that's I mean, Mr. Clerk, help me here, but I I think that's pretty iffy about it being in order because it is contrary to what they're trying to do. But what I would say is if this motion fails, then procedurally you I'll come to you and you could move that that whole package. Mr. Mr. Clerk. Um, thank you to the chair. I that I think the chair is absolutely right. In this case, I think the intent of the mover is not to consider BNC and to then propose to consider BNC would be contrary to the main motion as submitted. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Um, okay. >> Okay. Anybody else? Okay. I just have a question um to our staff. Uh, I I actually I have some concerns about just receiving it, although I suspect that the end result will be the same regardless of whether we just receive it or not. But can you just tell me what are the implications of us passing the motion on the table at the moment where we just reert we just receive it >> um directly to the chair. My understanding is that a decision of non-decision or you know just receiving uh the recommendation would be uh comparable to a non-concurrence but st council has not given uh staff the direction to advise industry Canada of that position. >> Okay. But in so as this if this goes forward with whatever we do uh with regard to what's on the table then what happens to the what happens to the application as it moves through the rest of the process? >> So the applicant could then um proceed with the dispute resolution process with Industry Canada. >> Okay. And if they're if they come out the other end favorable then they build the tower. If they don't, then they won't. What will industry Canada look at if we if we pass this today? >> To be clear, I don't know. Uh they may look at it as a non-decision and no council resolution in that regard and they can make the decision um to to proceed with the tower or not. >> But we're not providing any information as to why we wouldn't agree with this. and it will be completely up to the industry Canada to make the decision from there. >> That is my understanding. >> Okay. Um Okay. So, thank you. So, I I'm I'm troubled by this too and I and I share the frustration that council has because you know, every single time a sale tower comes up, it ends up being uh you know, controversial. We end up getting people that are upset about it. And I understand that. And I also understand I've spoken to uh Miss Fox uh at least once uh about the research that she's done and it's it's um very interesting to say the least, but unfortunately the the federal government has deemed these uh cell towers within the bounds that they're allowed uh to be safe. And um and the unfortunate reality is I'm I'm not going to do this, but I'll bet you if I asked everybody in this room to put up their hand if they own at least one cell phone, everybody would put up their hand. Um so I I think the the problem is there's all there are times where people um don't like the infrastructure that's being proposed in their neighborhood. But again, it's not like this one cell tower isn't a piece of infrastructure on its own. It is a piece of a wider network and there's no question about it that the the cell network is uh growing as our community is growing and it is infrastructure that would be comparable to roads to stop signs to pipes all that other thing types of things that make our community function as a community. So um I I can't support this. I although having said that I I do want to be clear that I think the system that we have to ask cities to basically make a decision over such a a small amount of minutia compared to the largestgeness of the issue that that uh residents have. It's a broken system and I don't think the system is functioning well for anybody uh including the proponents, including the public and including us on council. So, um I I'm not going to support it, but honestly, at the end of the day, I I have to be honest. I I suspect when Industry Canada gets this information, um they're probably going to proceed uh because I we haven't supplied them any reasons why this wouldn't be something that could or should be approved. And at the end of the day, if this is not approved in this particular location, when that area gets built out there, they will still need a cell tower, I suspect. And the cell tower will be built, but it'll be built somewhere else. So, um, anyway, that's those are my thoughts. Uh, we have a motion then in front of us. Seeing no other comments. >> Okay. >> Um, thank you. Uh, voting on the motion to receive the report. Councelor Leu. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Councelor Shu. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Region Local. Councelor Chan, >> yes. >> Thank you, Councelor Silvance. >> Yes. Thank you, Councelor Davidson. Thank you, Councelor Thompson. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Region Local. Councelor Depala, >> no. >> Thank you, Mayor West. >> No. >> Thank you, Councelor Tree. >> Councelor Tree, please. >> Yes. >> Thank you. That motion does carry. >> Okay. So, what I would recommend is we take a break. Why don't we say we're back here at uh 115 or so? >> Okay. >> Not tried, Norph. >> It's the only thing. It's the only thing. >> Well, I don't know. What do you >> I mean, >> all right. Okay, fine. Let's Let's uh Okay, fine. If that's the will of council, let's stick around for this. Okay. Go ahead. Uh so, councelor uh Selivitz, do you want to get us led off on that? Uh, sure. Let me just rearrange my papers. Um, okay. So, I will move the staff recommendations um with regards to um SRPBS 2630. Um, excuse me. I want to thank Mr. Theodoris for all his comments. Um, and I'm I'm certainly not disregarding them in any way, and I also want to commend him on his his dedication to um his uh to his neighborhood. Uh I think uh it's it's commendable. However, we are faced with certain issues here and I think it's very important to get on the record. um some of the issues that I that I have had in email discussions uh with residents who have been registered um with regards to to this matter and that is it's very important to note that a the developer has worked very well collaboratively both with myself and staff and and the OOLT entity in order to bring us this particular mediated um uh the these these recommendations. There were key changes that have been made between the applicant's original proposal and the current proposal and they are a reduction in the overall built form, a reduction in overall site density even though it still may be above what is it is permitted. There has been quite the reduction. an increase in the size of the proposed linear park block which was very very important to the city and to Ward 5. A reduction in tower floor plate sizes incredibly incredibly important. and increase tower and podium setbacks that are consistent with the official plan requirements to ensure adequate access to sunlight. privacy minimum shadow minimize shadow impacts and ensure the proposed development does not preclude development opportunity of adjacent properties which is something that we must have regard for and most importantly it meets the angular plane requirements from the adjacent low density uh res residential area and that is critical because that is what the OOLT would um would uh would specifically look at There's just two two questions I would like to refer to uh to staff if you don't through you Mr. Mr. Chair. Number one um to our clerk. Um comments have been made about um about our residents not being informed appropriately uh with regards to the committee of the whole meeting last week and this this meeting here at at council. Could you state for the record please exactly what it is that you as our clerk's department, our legislative department is or you are bound to do to inform uh residents whether they be on an OOLT uh docket or not as to any upcoming meetings other than a council public meeting through you Mr. Chair. Um, thank you through the chair and I thank the counselor for the question because uh, regrettably I think the the comments that were made could be construed as suggesting that somehow the city is not fulfilling its legislative obligations which is not the case. Um, especially and I I'll start in this way with this one. This is a matter before the Ontario land tribunal. Notice is given in accordance with directions of the tribunal. That is how we give notice. Uh and in fact uh the city of Richmond Hill is far more transparent on these matters than many municipalities. Uh many municipalities consider these matters in close session. >> We are very transparent on these matters uh in having these considered here in open session. Uh and uh we give notice when required to do so uh by the tribunal. Um otherwise because this is not an application that is goes before council public meetings or through that decision-making process um there is no notice requirement other than what the tribunal provides. Of course, if we if this was a brand new app development application, going to a council public meeting or having just received it and having a complete application, we give notice and as required by the planning act or any other piece of legislation, um we are always very careful to follow those legislation uh very very carefully because it's fundamental to the success of council's position to follow the rules and therefore my office to follow the rules. But this uh we followed the direction of the tribunal in giving notice and the city is already very very transparent on these matters more than many of our uh other municipalities. >> Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I appreciate that and I really felt that that needed to go on the record. My my my second question through you, Mr. Chair, is to is to our legal council, Mr. Deilta. Um with regards to um Mr. Theodoris's comments that um should we proceed with the hearing, it could be accommodating through existing budgets. I'm reading here what he's written um uh prepared for the September 17th, 2025 meeting partially partially due to the fact that only 10 days in July have been set aside at at the OOLT. Mr. Mr. Delta, can you please comment for the record as to the imperative and the necessity for us to look at what is set before us through the recommendations by council and how it is h how we must look at it through a specific lens um of of time, effort and money. Through you, Mr. Chair. >> Uh through you, Mr. Mayor, um uh there it is. The 10-day hearing is a significant hearing. It's not uh it's not a one-day hearing as you may have on a committee of adjustment appeal. So 10 days, uh means that I think on the the city's witness list there was four potential witnesses and there's pages of issues that if if um if it proceeded to the entire 10 days, it is a significant event. there's quite a bit of staff resources not only in the attendance of the 10 days but also in the prep time leading up to that uh event. So usually you you double it in prep time um depending on the witnesses and the issues. So it is a significant um use of municipal resources in terms of for to do the hearing. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um so in closing I would also like to say that um the 15 stories that are that are being recommended here are uh are permitted under the previous the previous um I'm sorry the previous OPA um the policy regime that allowed a height of 15 stories. So, so that's what is that is also what we are going on here namely prior to the approval of OPA 181 1817. The proposal is was under the maximum height applicable but hasn't exceeded didn't exceed density policies. The density has been reduced from 5.2 to 3.82 and I believe that is significant. And secondly, if I may, I know I'm going to go over time. I just want to add that the applicant has satisfied the affordable housing policies of the official plan through the commitment to provide affordable housing with a known nonprofit provider community living central York as well as the provision of 14% or 37 familysized units threebedrooms within the development and that is very very significant and um therefore I I I will for I definitely will forward this motion to approve the staff recommendations. I believe it is the absolute best that we can as a city expect to get. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Region Local Counselor Depalo, you will second it. >> Uh yes, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. And and with that, I just want to um I just want to really commend the local counselor and all of her efforts in in this in this um in in this attempt. it's the it's the right thing to do to to direct our staff to go back and and and approve and accept the the changes that have been brought forward here. And I I I I think it needs to be emphasized that that what's been negotiated here is a reduction in the overall built form, a reduction in the overall site density, an increase in the proposed park, a reduction in the tower floor plates and more separation then uh between towers and you know um it meets the angler plane and that that's so critical. So, um I I I really I really think this is the right way to go. I think as um as as the ward counselor said, I think that the big thing is and the important thing to remember is that it's uh it's very probable that the applicant would be able to receive even greater building parameters um if you if we just throw this up to the to the province and to the board's final decision. So, um, in in, uh, recognition of of all those factors and and, uh, knowing that this is, uh, at at this time, the pro the the way the province views high-rise developments on Young Street, I think this is absolute best way to proceed and and a and a real win given a a tough situation. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, anybody? Okay. Uh, thank you through the chair. I do want to begin by acknowledging that I had concerns about this application right throughout the process and I still have some reservations today. But the earlier versions of the application were in my opinion clearly too intense for this location. In fact, staff themselves previously recommended against the proposal because of the unresolved issues related to height, density, built form compatibility, the surrounding area, whatever. Uh so I think it's important that we recognize that the proposal before us today is not the same proposal that was originally brought forward. And you know I got to thank staff for the negotiations and ongoing work uh with the applicant uh to get the scale of this development materially reduced. But at the same time I think we need to be honest that this proposal still exceeds what our official plan currently contemplates for this area. the height and density being proposed are above the permissions established through the official plan amendment 18.7. However, we also have to consider the broader planning context that exists today. These lands are as I understand within the protected major transit station area even though I concur with Mr. Theodore that uh it probably shouldn't be a PMTSA but that's besides the point. Um so provincial policy strongly supports intensification higher density transit oriented development in this uh location. So even though I don't personally agree uh you know with that framework well it's uh within the Ontario Land Tribunal at this point and uh I think that's something that we really have to you know think about. So council council is not making this decision in a vacuum. The matter being before OOLT staff has advised that in their professional planning opinion, the revised proposal represents a form of development that can be supported and defended. And that matters because if this uh if we were as a council were to reject that settlement today then um what would happen at OOLT is that they can use that as ammunition against us and you know so they'll be at OOLT they're looking at the original proposal and in all likelihood we would not get what we've able to get or secure today and we if anything, we probably end up somewhere maybe in the middle. So, yeah, this is really the best that we're going to get. Um, so I do not believe that staff arrived at this recommendation lightly. My sense is that they worked to secure the best outcome possible. Um, you know, under the circumstances and uh, you know, do I think this proposal is perfect? No. You know, do I think it reflects exactly what council originally envisioned for this area? Probably not. But I have to weigh the planning realities, the policy environment, the risks associated with the OOLT process, and the work that staff have done to improve this application from where it started. And for those reasons, while I continue to have some concerns, I am prepared to support the staff recommendations. Thank you. Those are my comments. >> Okay. Anybody else? Okay. I just very quickly uh I I think it needs to be said because I'm not sure it's been very clear in this discussion that um you know we could turn this down. I mean we do have the ability as council to do that. But um if we turn this down, it will go to the full 10day u uh hearing that we have scheduled. It'll cost a lot of money. And if you think realistically about this, um, like at the very very very best case scenario, we might get a few units off. It might get a teeny little bit smaller. You probably wouldn't notice the difference between what's being proposed and and what that best case scenario might end up showing. Um, but the the the the danger in this is that it could be actually worse than that. And we've seen that happen in Richmond Hill uh on Young Street at Oxford. uh earlier in this term. So, the reason that that we would go with this and and vote in favor of it is it is getting pretty close. It's not right on, but it's getting pretty close to what we expect in that area. I want to thank staff for working really hard actually to make sure that they're, you know, grinding this developer down to the point where it's actually acceptable to the community. Um I also I'm pretty sure this is rental. Is that correct? Is is it a condo? >> Uh they have the applicant has not confirmed the tenure. >> Okay. Okay. I understood there was a possibility that it was going to be rental and if that is the case uh that is a form of of housing that we're desperately short of. So I would I would be much happier to see it as rental. Um the final thing I'll just say is I I'm not sure that I understood the uh reference to the various uh things that I've said over the last few years, but what I I will say to clarify that is uh I will be advocating for GO service and I will be advocating for the subway and other transit priorities because we need them. A lot of those decisions are not directly within our purview as a municipality, but part of the job of the municipality is to make sure that it's clear to the funding agencies of this transit that we need it and we need it quickly. But I would also say, and this is I think very important is the GO train and the TTC train are serve slightly different purposes. A GO train is more of an express type service. TTC is more of a a service that stops at many many stations along the way and they serve even geographically different areas. So, we can't be just going uh and advocating for one. We need to be advocating for both. But regardless, uh according to provincial legislation, this area is a uh an area that is going to be uh increased in density. it is right beside a GO train um line and uh you know we need to be advocating as much as possible to increase the the frequency of trains on that line. It's not easy. I understand that because it is a very busy freight line but in the end um it is also an important transit uh uh piece in our uh transit puzzle that we have here in Richmond Hill. So I will be supporting this. uh it may not be what people necessarily want, but I really believe it's best for the community and and um and it will get approved uh one way or the other and I think this is the best deal that we're likely going to get to see uh based on the process. >> So with that, >> just a quick wrap-up if I may. Go ahead. >> Thank you. So, um I just I just want to add this that an important part of this entire discussion is that I believe staff's recommendations to approve the revised application is our very best approach to ensuring the local neighborhood and the city as a whole receive the best outcomes outcomes at a provincial quas quasi judicial hearing of which we have little to no control. Our control here lies in ensuring we approve a land use planning application, which again, while certainly not be perfect and not be exactly what all of us want, is most likely the best solution. We as a city can legitimately accept. Should we reject this revised application, it is entirely probable that the applicant would be able to receive uh greater building parameters through the province's final decision. So given all of the above, I do believe that this is the this is the correct decision for all concerned. I ask for a recorded vote. >> Is anybody planning on voting against this? >> No, I'm asking for a recorded vote because it was requested from the resident. >> All right. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Uh voting on the chair uh voting pardon me through the chair voting on the motion. Councelor Silvance. >> Yes. Thank you, councelor Tree. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Regional Local. Councelor Chan, >> yes. >> Thank you, councelor Leu. Thank you, Councelor Davidson. Thank you, Mayor West. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Councelor Thompson. >> Yes. >> Thank you, Regional Local. Councelor Depala, >> yes. >> Thank you, Councelor Shu. >> Yes. >> Thank you. That does carry unanimously. Okay, we need a uh uh motion to approve the bylaws. Councelor Davidson, Councelor Leu, all those in favor opposed. That carries. Thank you. We need a motion to uh pass the confirmatory bylaw. Councelor Davidson, Councelor Shu, all those in favor. Oppose. That carries. And finally, a motion to adjurnn. Councelor Thompson, Councelor Leu, all those in favor.