Agenda

Meetings of Toronto City Council are being conducted by electronic means. 

These measures are necessary to comply with physical distancing requirements and a Provincial Order that limits public gatherings.

The meetings of Toronto City Council continue to be conducted publicly and may be viewed live on meeting day at www.toronto.ca/council

Notice to people writing to Council: The City of Toronto Act, 2006 and the City of Toronto Municipal Code authorize the City of Toronto to collect any personal information in your communication or presentation to City Council or its committees. The City collects this information to enable it to make informed decisions on the relevant issue(s). If you are submitting letters, faxes, e-mails, presentations or other communications to the City, you should be aware that your name and the fact that you communicated with the City will become part of the public record and will appear on the City’s website. The City will also make your communication and any personal information in it – such as your postal address, telephone number or e-mail address – available to the public, unless you expressly request the City to remove it.

Closed Meeting Requirements: If Council wants to meet in closed session (privately), a Member of Council must place a motion to do so and give the reason why Council has to meet privately (City of Toronto Act, 2006).

October 22, 2020.

toronto.ca/council

This agenda and any supplementary materials submitted to the City Clerk can be found online at www.toronto.ca/council. Visit the website for access to all agendas, reports, decisions and minutes of City Council and its committees.

- O Canada

- Moment of Silence

City Council will confirm the Minutes from the regular meeting held on September 30, October 1 and 2, 2020.

Deferred Items:

Infrastructure and Environment Committee Item IE15.11

Scarborough Community Council Item SC12.4

Report of the Executive Committee from Meeting 17 on October 21, 2020

Submitted by Mayor John Tory, Chair

Report of the Board of Health from Meeting 22 on October 19, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Joe Cressy, Chair

Report of the Economic and Community Development Committee from Meeting 16 on October 14, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Michael Thompson, Chair

Report of the General Government and Licensing Committee from Meeting 16 on October 5, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Paul Ainslie, Chair

Report of the Infrastructure and Environment Committee from Meeting 16 on October 6, 2020

Submitted by Councillor James Pasternak, Chair

Report of the Planning and Housing Committee from Meeting 17 on October 20, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Ana Bailão, Chair

Report of the Etobicoke York Community Council from Meeting 18 on October 8, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Mark Grimes, Chair

Report of the North York Community Council from Meeting 18 on October 7, 2020

Submitted by Councillor James Pasternak, Chair

Report of the Scarborough Community Council from Meeting 18 on October 16, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Jennifer McKelvie, Chair

Report of the Toronto and East York Community Council from Meeting 19 on October 15, 2020

Submitted by Councillor Gord Perks, Chair

New Business and Business Previously Requested, submitted by City Officials 

Members of Council will declare interests under the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act.

Members of Council may file petitions.

Various presentations and announcements will be made at the City Council meeting.

City Council will review the Order Paper.

The Infrastructure and Environment Committee recommends that:

1. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to consider and explore including, as part of either the 2021 update to the cycling network plan, the COVID-19 pandemic cycling network expansion response plan or potentially as part of the YongeTOmorrow process, a temporary protected bikeway along Yonge Street from south of St. Clair Avenue to north of Lawrence Avenue in conjunction with on-street patios, road safety and traffic-calming measures, and other streetscape improvements identified through consultation with local businesses and community groups, following the complete streets approach applied to Danforth Avenue, with implementation by the second quarter of 2021, and iteration and evaluation throughout 2021.

The ActiveTO initiative has played a vital role in Toronto’s recovery and rebuild process, providing city residents of all ages and abilities with new, temporary and permanent, bikeways, which allow them to enjoy fresh air, obtain healthy exercise, and safely get around the city.

The benefit of these cycling facilities must now be expanded to reach other parts of the city. "Our streets are going to look different in many places in the post-COVID world...we will need more bike infrastructure," said Mayor John Tory when launching the ActiveTO initiative, which is "going to mean more business for shop owners, it’s going to mean that we’re going to take some of the pressure off our transit system and protect the health of the city."

Building a resilient city not only means providing clean and safe transportation alternatives during the current pandemic but achieving existing city policies, including the Vision Zero Road Safety Plan, the Cycling Network Plan, TransformTO’s climate mitigation plan through the reduction of short trips travelled by car, as well as the City’s equity and public health initiatives.

Given the aforementioned policy goals, the need to accommodate active transportation during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the strong local community support, it is crucial that we prioritize a temporary bikeway along Yonge Street in Midtown, aligned with TTC’s Line 1.

The Scarborough Community Council submits the item to City Council without recommendations.

Scarborough Community Council directed:

1. That the City Solicitor, Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and appropriate City Staff attend a meeting with the local Councillors and the applicant, to discuss a possible resolution in advance of the January 29, 2020 City Council meeting and that the City Solicitor report to City Council at the January 29, 2020 meeting with the outcome of the discussions.

This application proposes to amend the Toronto Official Plan to add a Site and Area Specific Policy (SASP) for the lands known as the Eglinton Square lands (1-70 Eglinton Square, 1431 and 1437 Victoria Park Avenue, 14-26 and 19-23 Engelhart Crescent, and 64-68 Harris Park Drive) to permit a mixed use development.  The SASP would provide for a mixed-use community to develop over time on the lands.  The mixed-use development would include multiple tall buildings with a range of building heights and stacked townhouses with a total of 1,630 residential units and 26,004 m2 of new retail uses proposed to be developed in five (5) blocks.

The Official Plan Amendment (OPA) application was submitted on October 4, 2016, and has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), now the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) citing City Council's failure to make a decision within the prescribed time frames set out in the Planning Act.  The appeal was filed on November 10, 2017.

A related Rental Housing Demolition and Conversion application (File No. 16 230698 ESC 35 RH) under Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act (Chapter 667 of the Municipal Code) was also submitted on October 4, 2016 to allow for the removal of 91 rental units in eight (8) existing apartment buildings, to be replaced elsewhere in the future redevelopment of the site. Review of this application is underway and a decision on this application will be deferred until such time as a decision has been made by the LPAT on the OPA application, and a decision has been made on the Zoning By-law Amendment (17 242390 ESC 35 OZ) application for these lands.

On December 16, 2019, the City received a letter from the applicant's solicitor, being a "with prejudice" settlement offer and formal revision to the application ("Resubmission

Letter"). The Resubmission Letter advised that the applicant has amended its application to include all of its lands inclusive of the existing shopping mall, and excepting the block containing existing rental dwelling units (known as Block E in the original application), including a proposed density of 4.9 times the area of its lands. The letter cites that the reason it is amending its application is because the City asked the applicant to resubmit to include all of its holdings. The City, as common in many applications, requests a block context plan to understand how the development proposal fits within the larger context including other sites. This is especially the case in an emerging development area that will be the subject of major redevelopment in the future. City Staff did not request or invite a resubmission to include the shopping mall block, but only to illustrate the development proposal in the larger context that happens to include lands within the same land holdings as the subject lands.

The Resubmission Letter was not accompanied by any supporting reports or update letters from the original application, as acknowledged in the Resubmission Letter. City Staff are not in a position to adequately review, circulate and comment on the revised proposal given the timelines and lack of a complete submission package. It is unusual to receive a revised submission requesting additional density from an original submission and therefore the original supporting reports cannot be used to support the revised proposal.

Without a circulation and review, City staff cannot support the revisions.  Should the applicant intend to pursue a revision to its application, they should formally resubmit and provide the required documentation for City staff to review and after a reasonable circulation period, City staff will seek further direction. Until that time the City cannot establish a fulsome list of issues in opposition of the revised application at a hearing before the LPAT.  Accordingly, the report largely addresses the original application, however also recommends that the City Solicitor oppose the revised application.

The purpose of this report is to seek City Council's direction for the City Solicitor, together with appropriate City staff and/or external consultants, to attend the LPAT hearing to oppose the application in its current form. City staff have concerns with how the proposed Official Plan Amendment can be supported in the context of the GMSP consultants' reports and recommendations for the broader Golden Mile area and for the subject site.  

The GMSP consultants Transportation Master Plan ("TMP"), Community Infrastructure Strategy and the Master Servicing Plan ("MSP") provide comprehensively analyzed information to assist with the direction on how growth can be accommodated within the Golden Mile Area.  These studies will also be used to inform the emerging policy direction in the proposed Golden Mile Secondary Plan, as presented in the report dated December 20, 2019, and being considered at the January 8, 2020 Scarborough Community Council meeting.  The proposed Official Plan Amendment, in its current form, is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014), does not conform with the Growth Plan (2019), and does not conform to the City's Official Plan.

This report also recommends that the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff be authorized to continue discussions with the applicant in an effort to address the issues outlined in this report.

The Executive Committee recommends that:

1. City Council direct the City Manager to initiate dialogue with Federal, Provincial and Regional Officials to convene a strategic Federal-Provincial-Municipal Intergovernmental Table on recovery and renewal, to take a whole of governments approach to addressing the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and social determinants of health.

2. City Council direct the City Manager to report to City Council by end of the first quarter of 2021 on progress to deliver a streamlined, coordinated and renewed intergovernmental strategy, including an examination of existing intergovernmental requests, tables, relationships and partnerships, roles and responsibilities, Toronto’s priorities, relationships with Indigenous communities and methods for regular updates to advance shared priorities with government and regional partners for a strong recovery.

3. City Council request the Medical Officer of Health to review the recommendations and findings in the COVID-19: Impacts and Opportunities report from the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild in Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the City Manager and bring forward to the Board of Health any recommendations as appropriate.

4. City Council direct the Chief People Officer, the Director Indigenous Affairs Office and the Executive Director, Social Development, Finance and Administration to report to the Executive Committee on options to strengthen the City's equity and reconciliation infrastructure in order to support City Divisions with the additional tools required to deliver on the unique needs of Toronto’s diverse residents, including those who are part of Black, Indigenous and equity-seeking communities, given the disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 on these communities.

5. City Council direct City Officials to provide advice to City Council through the 2021 Budget process on options to prioritize identified needs arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and reallocate resources from services that can be modified or reduced to meet public health requirements.

6. City Council direct the City Manager to report to City Council as part of the 2021 Budget process, on an approach to respond to recommendations in the COVID-19: Impact and Opportunities report from the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild in Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the City Manager related to improvements to public engagement, by developing an engagement strategy that promotes meaningful engagement with racialized communities and Indigenous peoples, and improved data and research coordination.

The City Manager gave a presentation on Towards Recovery and Building a New Toronto.

This report is being brought to Council amidst an evolving pandemic. The report provides an update on the work undertaken by the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild (TORR), information on the response to COVID-19 by the City including coordination with our federal and provincial partners, and a roadmap towards recovery and rebuild.

As we continue to respond to the immediate needs of our residents, communities and businesses, we are also laying the foundation for our social and economic recovery. Protecting lives and livelihoods remains the City’s top priorities. The disproportionate impacts COVID-19 has had on racialized, indigenous and equity-seeking communities have deepened the inequalities that are already experienced by residents, neighbourhoods and communities across our City. Uncertainty has become a prevalent characteristic of how COVID-19 has reshaped our lives, and this will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.

The City has an opportunity to address these inequities, as we focus on the critical needs of residents and businesses and the economic, health and social hardships they face, and as we tackle both resurgences of the virus and lay the foundation for a strong recovery together.

Building back better also means learning from the past and starting sustainable improvements that make a difference for future generations. Our recovery efforts must take a long-term view towards building the city we want for those who will call Toronto home decades from now.

This report has two primary objectives:

The first objective is to affirm my commitment to deliver timely, informed advice and information to Council to support the challenging decisions that lie ahead as we continue to grapple with the impacts of COVID-19. This includes marshalling the Toronto Public Service to continue to provide responsive and effective services to Torontonians and applying what we know of the City's new reality and financial context.

This report reinforces my commitment, and that of the Toronto Public Service, to maintain the trust of Toronto residents and of City Council at a time when confidence in government and with each other is critical. We must view the road to recovery from COVID-19 as more of a marathon than a sprint, and one we cannot travel alone - our community and government relationships have never mattered more. As such, this will be the first in a series of reports on updates and next steps for our recovery.

The second objective is to respond to the report from the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild (TORR), COVID-19: Impacts and Opportunities.

The report, by Dr. David Mowat and Mr. Saäd Rafi (Attachment 1), considered the input from thousands of residents, businesses and organizations and includes 83 recommendations based on those consultations and their expertise. The accompanying report, COVID-19: Impacts and Opportunities Engagement Summary (Attachment 2) provides details about the consultations and the wide range of ideas and feedback from participants who added their voices to these issues at a time when many were experiencing personal challenges and difficult situations.

Two additional attachments to this report outline preliminary disposition and analysis of the 83 recommendations made by Dr. Mowat and Mr. Rafi (Attachments 3 and 4). This report considers those recommendations as well as existing City services and programs, input from residents and community partners, advice from City divisions and what they have learned from the pandemic, the City’s finances and 2021 budget projections, emerging research and plans from institutions and organizations, and commitments and plans from the federal and provincial governments.

I wish to thank Dr. Mowat and Mr. Rafi for their work advising the City since April, bringing their insights and expertise to the City's restart, recovery and rebuild actions, decisions and plans. Their work with City divisions and our partners at a wide range of tables, discussions, and engagements resulted in guidance and advice on public health, the economy, equity, resilience, mobility, and increasing prosperity for Toronto. A list of the City's action in the first six months of the pandemic is provided in Attachment 5 to this report and summarized below.

The expertise contributed by Dr. Mowat and Mr. Rafi supported the City’s reopening efforts as well as our longer-term approaches and plans. I offer my sincere thanks to them for providing us with their comprehensive final report, COVID-19: Impacts and Opportunities, a rich document of findings from which we will continue to draw from and reference as we work to reopen, recover and rebuild our City.

The Executive Committee recommends that:

Updated Mandate for Toronto Community Housing Corporation

1. City Council adopt the 2021 Mandate Direction Document for Toronto Community Housing Corporation outlined in Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services and, as Shareholder, request the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to work with the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services to carry out the actions described in the 2021 Mandate Direction document.

2. City Council direct the City Manager to amend the Shareholder Direction to make permanent the process for selecting Tenant Board members outlined in Attachment 2 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services and originally adopted by City Council in 2018.EX30.2 as an interim procedure to select Tenant Board members.

3. City Council direct the City Manager to report back to City Council in 2021 with an updated the Shareholder Direction for the Toronto Community Housing Corporation.

Integrated Service Model Implementation

4. City Council approve the Integrated Service Model Accountability Framework in Attachment 4 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

5. City Council, as Shareholder, direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to comply with the Integrated Service Model Accountability Framework requirements in Attachment 4 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

6. City Council, as Shareholder, direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to support the successful implementation of the Integrated Service Model in the Seniors Housing Unit at Toronto Community Housing Corporation by completing the actions related to the Integrated Service Model in the 2021 Mandate Direction Document as listed in Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

7. City Council acknowledge and formally thank the leadership of the Toronto Central Local Health Integration Network for their involvement in the development and continued contribution to the Integrated Service Model for seniors-designated social housing in Toronto.

Toronto Seniors Housing Corporation Timeline

8. City Council direct the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services to report to the Executive Committee by the Spring of 2021 with recommended timelines for the creation of the Seniors Housing Corporation and recommendations for related approvals.

Office of the Commissioner of Housing Equity

9. City Council direct the City Manager to consider the investigation and process review functions of the Office of the Commissioner of Housing Equity in the City’s development of the future Housing Commissioner role or function, with a focus on aligning roles between these two offices, if appropriate. 

Scattered Properties Request For Proposals Process and Transfers

10. City Council direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to negotiate an agreement of purchase and sale, with direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, for the sale of the 623 scattered properties containing 729 units described in Attachment 6 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services to the selected non-profit proponent(s) identified in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services based substantially on the terms and conditions outlined in the joint City-Toronto Community Housing Corporation Request for Proposals, the submission of the selected proponent(s), and such other terms and conditions that are satisfactory to both the Toronto Community Housing Corporation and the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services and to complete such agreements of purchase and sale with any additional direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

11. City Council approve the reclassification of the properties listed in Attachment 7 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services that were originally identified as uninhabitable in Confidential Attachment of 2018.EX34.3 to be considered scattered houses and City Council direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to negotiate an agreement of purchase and sale, with direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, of those addresses to the selected proponent(s) of the Request for Proposals process identified in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, based on the terms and conditions outlined in the joint City-Toronto Community Housing Corporation Request for Proposals and such other terms and conditions that are satisfactory to both Toronto Community Housing Corporation and the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services with pricing determined by the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services and to complete such agreements of purchase and sale with any additional direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

12. City Council direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to negotiate an agreement of purchase and sale, with direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, for any remaining uninhabitable or agency houses that the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services deems unallocated to the selected proponent(s) of the Request for Proposals identified in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services or with other qualified proponents identified by the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, at the direction of the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services based on the terms and conditions outlined in the joint City-Toronto Community Housing Corporation Request For Proposals and such other terms and conditions that are satisfactory to both the Toronto Community Housing Corporation and the Deputy City Manager,  Community and Social Services with pricing determined by the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, and to complete such agreements of purchase and sale with any additional direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

13. City Council amend the previously approved lists of transfers of Toronto Community Housing Corporation Agency, Rooming and Uninhabitable Houses by:

a. adding the following addresses to the list of Agency Houses approved by City Council and listed in Appendix 1 to the report (January 9, 2018) from the Deputy City Manager, Cluster A of Item 2018.EX30.2: 143A Stephenson Avenue, 143B Stephenson Avenue, and 143C Stephenson Avenue;

b. adding 41 D'arcy Street to the list of Rooming Houses described in 2018.EX30.2; and

c. deleting 127 Sackville Street from the list of Agency Houses.

14. City Council direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to negotiate an agreement of purchase and sale, with direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, of any additional scattered housing not identified in the Request For Proposals but identified through forthcoming due diligence with the selected proponent(s) based on the terms and conditions outlined in the joint City-Toronto Community Housing Corporation Request For Proposals and such other terms and conditions that are satisfactory to both Toronto Community Housing Corporation and the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services with pricing determined by the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, and to complete such agreements of purchase and sale with any additional direction from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services.

15. City Council direct the Board of Directors of Toronto Community Housing Corporation to transfer ownership of any agency, uninhabitable or rooming house property approved by to non-profit corporations in each case at a below market transfer price determined by the City Manager.

16. City Council acting as Shareholder, approve the sale and transfer of all the properties referenced in the Recommendations 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 above pursuant to Section 7.4.1(b) of the Shareholder Direction.

17.City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration to provide, on behalf of the City acting as Service Manager under the Housing Services Act, consents pursuant to subsection 161(2) and 162(2) of the Housing Services Act, as required, to transfers by Toronto Community Housing Corporation described in Recommendations 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 above, and to mortgages by transferees, subject to such terms and conditions that the General Manager, Shelter Support and Housing Administration considers reasonable and necessary to carry out City Council's decision, including, without limitation, compliance with the Housing Services Act and the Service Manager's local rules and standards, occupancy costs, the operation of the housing project, funding, reporting and accountability, the mandate and target tenants or residents for the housing project, and tenant supports.

18. City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, on behalf of the City, to enter into one or more operating agreements and other such agreements as may be required with the selected proponent(s) and the entities that may operate the properties referenced in Recommendations 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 above to ensure the housing assets are operated as affordable housing in perpetuity and to address compliance with the Housing Services Act and the Service Manager's local rules, occupancy costs, the operation of the housing project, funding, reporting and accountability, the mandate and target tenants or residents for the housing project, and tenant supports.

19. City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration acting as Service Manager on behalf of the City of Toronto under the Housing Services Act, 2011, to adjust funding and rent-geared-to-income service levels for the operating agreement with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation to reflect its reduced operating costs as a result of the transfers approved in Recommendations 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 above. 

20. City Council direct that Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (October 6, 2020) from the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services remain confidential in its entirety as it pertains to the pending disposition of property by the Toronto Community Housing Corporation until the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services authorizes its release.

Since 2016, City Council has approved a series of actions recommended through work of the Tenants First project to steer Toronto Community Housing Corporation ("TCHC") toward long-term, sustainable change in which TCHC focuses on being a social housing landlord, buildings are in a good state of repair, and tenants are connected to appropriate services.

In July 2019, City Council approved the phased implementation of a new Integrated Service Model ("ISM") for tenants in TCHC's 83 seniors-designated buildings to improve housing services and to better coordinate access to health and housing services to support seniors aging in place. It also directed staff to develop an accountability framework for the ISM to provide stronger City oversight into TCHC's delivery of the new model. In addition, City Council approved in principle the creation of a stand-alone seniors housing corporation to operate these 83 buildings subject to the completion of a due diligence review.

In conducting a due diligence review, City staff, working collaboratively with TCHC and supported through an external legal firm, examined financial, legal, and labour relations risks as well as the overall governance structure of the future corporation. Creating the seniors housing corporation will benefit from using a phased approach for start-up and implementation: Phase 1 - Establishing the corporation and appointing a board; Phase 2 - Start-up and Transition, including recruiting key corporate executives and transferring tenancies, staff and contracts from TCHC to the new corporation; Phase 3 - Full operations. Each of these three phases will require a varying amount of City resources. 

Since the due diligence review began in late 2019, the City has experienced the devastating impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and has dedicated, and will continue to dedicate a significant amount of staffing and financial resources to its response and, going forward, its recovery and rebuilding efforts. Given that the ongoing pandemic and associated recovery and rebuild period is anticipated to extend into 2021, this report recommends that City Council delay launching the seniors housing corporation until the COVID situation has stabilized. An update will be provided to City Council by the spring of 2021 with recommended timing on creating the seniors housing corporation. Until a corporation is established, TCHC will continue to maintain a dedicated Seniors Housing Unit which reports directly the TCHC’s Chief Executive Officer, and City staff will continue to do the preparatory work required for the establishment of a separate corporation. 

The City remains committed to improving service to senior tenants in social housing through the continued roll out of the ISM which was approved by City Council in July 2019.  Additionally, the City will have increased oversight, ensuring that the ISM is being effectively implemented and is achieving its intended outcomes, through an ISM accountability framework recommended in this report (and described in Attachment 4). The ISM's key features include increased staff to tenant ratios, better coordinated access to health services and supports through the Local Health Integration Network and community partners, and seniors health and wellness hubs.

Changes to the operations of TCHC's seniors housing portfolio through the creation of a new corporation necessitates a review in the Office of the Commissioner of Housing Equity's (OCHE) structure and function related to supporting senior and vulnerable TCHC tenants. This report recommends that the City Manager consider specific roles of the OCHE in the review and establishment of a Housing Commissioner role or function within the City, with a focus on aligning OCHE and Housing Commissioner functions if appropriate. Staff anticipate reporting to Committee and Council by the end of this year on the Housing Commissioner and the OCHE.

This report also provides an update and makes recommendations with respect to an updated mandate for TCHC, and the transfer of TCHC's remaining 729-unit scattered house portfolio to the non-profit housing sector. 

The Executive Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the General Manager, Transportation Services, in consultation with the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards, to extend the CafeTO program (including the authority with respect to liquor sales) to allow for the review, approval and installation of curbside cafés (sidewalk cafes adjacent to curblane) and frontage cafés from November 16, 2020 to April 14, 2021, inclusive, in accordance with the CafeTO program set out in section 742-2.1D of Chapter 742, Sidewalk Cafes, Parklets and Marketing Displays.

2.  City Council waive fees required under Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 742, Sidewalk Cafés, Parklets and Marketing Displays, Chapter 743, Streets and Sidewalks, Use of, and Chapter 441, Fees and Charges, for any curbside café or frontage café approved by the General Manager, Transportation Services under the program described in Part 1 above.

3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the necessary Bills to give effect to City Council's decision and City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make any necessary clarifications, refinements, minor modifications, technical amendments, or by-law amendments as may be identified by the City Solicitor in order to give effect to the reasonable operation of the extension of the CafeTO program as described in Part 1 above.

4. City Council authorize the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture to work with Destination Toronto and all business improvement areas including Toronto Association of Business Improvement Areas and businesses in non-Business Improvement Areas to support safe winter economy initiatives and promote the winter economy including BYOB – Bring Your Own Blanket campaigns promoting winter patios.

As you know, the pandemic has forced us to think of ways to adapt to our new realities. We have had the difficult job of balancing the needs of health and safety with those of our business community.

Last month, I moved a motion that we jointly approved to ask our City Staff to report back on the various successful programs implemented this summer, including CaféTO. That work is underway and will come back before the spring.

But we know winter is coming and we need to support winter patios as much as possible now.

As we move into the winter months, we want to find ways to help give our businesses as much adaptability as possible. We need to give businesses the flexibility to operate where safe and possible through the winter months. While we have some limitations with respect to patios in curb lanes and ensuring we can safely clear our roads from the snow, there are opportunities that allow us continue the success of winter patios in areas, such as sidewalks and private property including parking lots. In addition to the below recommendations, I have asked City Staff to continue working with BIAs on ideas or issues come forward this winter.

Through recommendations at the Planning and Housing committee, City Council will be able to extend the zoning bylaw amendments we put in place earlier this year. These will continue to ease restrictions on private property for outdoor patios through the winter months and into the spring. This will also increase the maximum size of outdoor patios and remove restrictions that might prevent an outdoor patio located in front of buildings.

In addition to those recommendations, I am proposing additional recommendations below that will ensure we allow for winter patios on our sidewalks.

The Executive Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the reallocation of cashflows within the Toronto Water Approved 2020 Capital Budget and 2021-2029 Capital Plan in the amount of $52.234 million, for acceleration and deferral of projects, as presented in Schedule A (Part A and B) to the report (September 24, 2020) from the General Manager, Toronto Water with a zero Budget impact.

2. City Council authorize the reallocation of project costs and cashflows in the Toronto Water Approved 2020 Capital Budget and 2021-2029 Capital Plan in the amount of $6.169 million from projects that have been awarded under budget or completed to those requiring additional funding in the same amount as presented in Schedule A (Part C) to the report (September 24, 2020) from the General Manager, Toronto Water with a zero Budget impact.

This report requests City Council's authority to amend Toronto Water's Approved 2020 Capital Budget and 2021-2029 Capital Plan by adjusting project cash flows contained within the Budget and Plan, respectively, to align forecasted project accelerations and deferrals. Additional reallocations to project cashflows and project costs are requested where additional project costs exceed the current approved cashflow. These reallocations will allow Toronto Water to continue to deliver projects within its capital plan. The adjustments will have a zero dollar impact on the 2020 Capital Budget and 2021-2029 Capital Plan and will align the budget and plan with Toronto Water's capital project delivery schedule and program requirements.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council direct the City Manager to provide an update on actions taken related to the report (October 14, 2020) from the Auditor General, including any referrals that are made to other agencies and regulatory bodies.

2.  City Council request the Director, Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits, and Green Shield Canada, to implement training for staff around the issue of health benefits fraud; and this should be recurring and updated as the nature of common types of fraud evolve.

3.  City Council request the Director, Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits, to undertake extra verification procedures to examine health claims coming from health spas.

4.  City Council request the Director, Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits, to direct all employees in this case to reimburse the City of Toronto for all past claims for themselves and their spouses for services involving the spa because they are not properly supported by legitimate invoices for approved services.

5.  City Council request the Director, Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits, to seek reimbursement from the employees in this case for all unsupported claims involving the spa and report on the status of the recovery and any resulting police or regulatory body investigation into the conclusions of the Auditor General's report.

6.  City Council request the Director, Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits, to seek to include in future collective agreements that health services must be medically necessary and that "off-label" use be supported by a physician and authorized by Green Shield Canada prior to reimbursement.

The Audit Committee considered Items AU6.1 and AU6.4 together.

The Auditor General gave a presentation on Employee Health Benefits Fraud Involving a Medical Spa.

This report summarizes an investigation into allegations of health benefits fraud involving three City of Toronto employees. It is our view that health benefits fraud against the City occurred on several occasions in this case.

We bring this matter to the attention of City Council, City management and City employees for three reasons:

1.  To communicate that by implementing past Auditor General recommendations, the City now has a more robust claims monitoring regime and an audit system in place that will likely catch more fraud. Fraud detection and fraud prevention help improve the sustainability of benefit plans.

2.  To report that management is taking appropriate actions to address all concerns raised in this case, including referring some matters to regulatory bodies for further consideration.

3.  To make City employees aware of the increased sophistication in monitoring benefit claims and to stress the importance of not becoming involved in schemes like the one identified in this report.

The case revolves around three City employees and the spouses of two of the City employees (the claimants), who independently attended a medical spa to receive treatment for various conditions. These claimants received documentation stating that a doctor (an obstetrician and gynecologist) diagnosed them with the skin condition of actinic keratosis and prescribed the drug Levulan Kerastick (Levulan) to them as the treatment. They received invoices from the spa stating they had been treated with Levulan for the condition of actinic keratosis (and other conditions). Actinic keratosis treatments with Levulan are covered by the City health benefits plan, whereas many other treatments offered by medical spas are not covered.

They all submitted claims that were reimbursed by the City's health benefits plan.

The claims submissions process is basically an honour system. It is the employee's responsibility to ensure the claims they submit for reimbursement are legitimate and correct. Audits and reviews are conducted after claims are submitted. 

Our investigation was extensive and involved interviews with the City employees, the spa owner, the spa's chief operations officer and three spa employees who treated the claimants. We also reviewed treatment records, spa invoices, spa receipts, emails, and analyzed health claim data. We sought information from subject matter experts in handwriting, dermatology, and pharmacology. We also conducted research on the drug Levulan and how it is dispensed, the condition actinic keratosis, and the rules for physicians and nurses in Ontario.

Although fraud has occurred, we cannot be absolutely sure of the extent and depth of the role or the exact knowledge of each person or organization (the spa, the doctor, some of the City employees, the treating technicians and/or registered practical nurse) played in these events because the very nature of a fraud often involves information that is concealed, altered and/or fabricated. In our view, not all those interviewed were always truthful or forthright.

However, based on all of the evidence we have reviewed, the diagnoses recorded on the Drug Special Authorization Forms were false and/or misleading for two of the employees. For the last employee, the invoices contain diagnoses she said she did not have. Some of the reimbursements helped employees to pay for treatments that were not covered by the City's health benefits plan. In all three cases, it is our view that health benefits fraud has occurred.

It is not the Auditor General's role to determine the consequences for employees found to have committed benefits fraud – that is up to City management. The lessons employees should take away from this investigation is that the City is much better at detecting benefits fraud and that benefits fraud can have repercussions beyond the loss of benefits: it can include termination of employment, criminal charges and regulatory investigations.

The Auditor General has made five recommendations to help the City learn from this investigation.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council request the City Manager to:

a.  coordinate with Heads of Divisions for those using GPS technology, including Transportation Services, to ensure that the contract with the City's GPS vendor meets the needs of the divisions and the City of Toronto; and

b.  forward the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General to all other Heads of Divisions for those using GPS technology and centrally oversee that the City's divisions are fully utilizing GPS technology and letting go of inefficient manual processes.

2.  City Council request the City Manager to work together with the Heads of Divisions using GPS technology and the Chief Technology Officer to prepare plans with specific deliverables and timelines to modernize processes and integrate technology solutions with the GPS system.

3.  City Council request the City Manager, in consultation with the Auditor General, to report to the Audit Committee in the first quarter of 2021 with recommendations on policies and/or processes that would provide a system of review and audit of both in-house and contracted services within each City division and that improves accountability to approved service levels and delivers on outcomes that ensure optimal value for taxpayer dollars.

4.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to fully utilize the GPS technology available, which includes real-time exception reports, notifications, and route completion and performance reports, to better monitor contractor performance.

5.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to prepare a plan with specific deliverables and timelines to modernize processes and integrate technology solutions with its GPS system.

6.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to ensure that staff use GPS information and reporting to monitor route completion, departure and return times, late starts, excessive stop times, and vehicle locations for operational as well as standby purposes and assess liquidated damages where applicable.

7.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to ensure that winter maintenance vehicles are equipped with a GPS device on an immediate and urgent basis and to report the status to the November 19, 2020 Audit Committee meeting.

8.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to review and reconcile the winter maintenance fleet to the inventory of GPS devices and to test the function, time accuracy, and status reporting mechanism of GPS devices for the 2020-2021 maintenance season and implement a weekly review and testing of the system on an ongoing basis.

9.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to work with the GPS provider and, after every plowing event, to run reports on departure and return times, including stopping times to late starts, stopping times, departure and return times, and tracking, and to conduct reviews and reconciliations and to report on the success and outcome of this process to the Audit Committee by the third quarter of 2021.

10.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to develop clear guidelines and allowances for acceptable stop times, break times, and the valid operational reasons for taking these stops and breaks.

11.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to improve how it documents and tracks vehicle breakdowns and the deployment of spare vehicles.

12.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to:

a.  ensure that all vehicles, including spares, are properly marked with vehicle identification numbers;

b.  conduct daily physical verification of contractor vehicles on standby, including spares, and document and compare the observations to contractor standby logs; and

c.  require the contractor to obtain prior approval from the contract administrator when a vehicle needs to go off-site for any reason and document the expected return date.

13.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to:

a.  improve documentation of assigned routes (and kilometres) and completed routes by contractor as well as ensure that explanations are documented for when routes are not fully completed; and

b.  examine the cases where routes do not appear to be completed for potential valid operational reasons and evaluate whether related issues need to be addressed.

14.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to clarify wording in future winter maintenance contracts concerning:

a.  the contractor's obligation to detect and report GPS device malfunctioning within a set timeframe;

b.  reasonable stop and break times;

c.  preventing vehicle swapping between routes and locations to ensure that GPS device information is accurate; and

d.  provisions for the assessment and enforcement of liquidated damages, including clarifying the expectation for when the work commences.

15.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to reassess and document the rationale for liquidated damages amounts in the next contract cycle, taking into account past claims against the City and other potential losses, to ensure that the liquidated damages amounts are fair and supportable.

16.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to coordinate with the City Manager to discuss and make improvements to the contract with the GPS vendor related to GPS repairs and turnaround time for devices.

17.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to establish a formal process to:

a.  ensure that GPS devices are installed and functioning in all contractor vehicles, including spares;

b.  track all GPS devices and monitor them regularly to ensure that the devices are functioning properly;

c.  periodically reconcile GPS billings;

d.  monitor and ensure that GPS functionality issues are being reported to the GPS vendor and repaired on a timely basis; and

e.  monitor the calibration and functionality of salt spreaders. 

18.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to:

a.  develop a policy and procedure manual for winter operations, including best practices for contract management and best practices for assessing and charging liquidated damages;

b.  standardize processes and forms for monitoring contractor performance and for assessing and charging liquidated damages; and

c.  ensure that staff verify and review contractors' operating and standby logs, using GPS data, for the accuracy of timing and services provided before approving payment.

19.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to provide additional training to ensure that staff have an up-to-date and clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities as well as strong knowledge of winter maintenance contract management policies and procedures.

20.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to consult with Legal Services in relation to the approach to take on the definition and charging of standby payments for the remainder (two years) of the current contract cycle.

21.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to work together with Legal Services on a detailed review of the contract documents and Request for Quote for the next contract cycle and make the necessary improvements to ensure internal consistency, consistent use of terminology and defined terms, and simplification for implementation.

22.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to ensure that the management and payment for services is consistent with the express terms of the contract for the next contract cycle.

23.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to perform a cost-benefit analysis of in-house versus outsourced delivery of its winter road maintenance program to determine whether it would be beneficial or not to increase the level of in-house delivery.

24.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to:

a.  develop meaningful Key Performance Indicators to measure the achievement of Council-approved service levels;

b.  develop performance metrics for the next contract cycle to measure and monitor contractor performance;

c.  improve processes and documentation to have relevant and readily-available information to measure the Key Performance Indicators; and

d.  publicly report on the Key Performance Indicators on at least an annual basis.

25.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to work with the GPS vendor to configure the:

a.  route completion report to provide accurate information and develop other GPS reports for measuring contractor performance and service levels; and

b.  GPS system's geofencing feature to monitor contractors' adherence to their designated routes.

26.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to analyze legal claims information and 311 service requests on a regular basis to provide additional indicators of where contractor performance needs closer monitoring.

27.  City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to develop a reporting process regarding complaints received about winter maintenance and to develop a process to include complaints in contract management and contractor performance evaluations, with a special emphasis on recurring issues.

The Audit Committee:

1.  Requested the General Manager, Transportation Services, in consultation with the City Solicitor and the Auditor General, to report to the Audit Committee at its meeting on November 19, 2020 on the prospect of recovery of overpayments to the winter maintenance vendors for either performance issues or reconciliation gaps with GPS records, on the terms and conditions of the contract, and the prospect of recovery of overpayments in prior years with respect to standby pay and on the implementation of terms and conditions in the contracts on a go forward basis.

The Auditor General, the Assistant Auditor General, the General Manager, Transportation Services, and the Director, Operations and Maintenance, Transportation Services, gave a presentation on Audit of Winter Road Maintenance Program - Phase One: Leveraging Technology and Improving Design and Management of Contracts to Achieve Service Level Outcomes.

The Audit Committee recessed its public session to meet in closed session to consider this item, as it relates to the security of the property of the City or local board, litigation or potential litigation affecting the City or local board, and advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose.

Keeping our roads and sidewalks salted and cleared of snow during winter months helps to ensure that the people travelling in the City of Toronto are safe and have a reliable transportation network.

The Auditor General's 2019 Audit Work Plan included a review of winter operations at Transportation Services Division. This report presents the results of Phase One of the operational review, which focused on whether the Division meets the council-approved service levels for winter road maintenance and whether it manages contracts, evaluates contractor performance, and holds contractors accountable as per the contract terms. The second phase will consider the operating efficiencies and the cost-benefits of contracting out versus in-house delivery of winter services.

We have made recommendations that will help the Division ensure a safe and reliable transportation network in the City of Toronto. These highlight that the City needs to:

1.  Fully leverage GPS technology and modernize its processes to efficiently and effectively manage the service levels, contractor performance, and accountability.

2.  Monitor, manage, and resolve contractor performance issues such as contractors starting their shifts late, claiming more hours than worked, taking excessive stop times, and operating without functioning GPS devices.

3.  Improve clarity and consistency in contract design for the next contract cycle, so that contracts are clearly understood by all parties and that Transportation Services manages to the express terms of the contract going forward.

4.  Develop Key Performance Indicators for winter operations and contractor performance, and measure outcomes to ensure contractors meet the required service levels.

Our audit provides 22 recommendations that will help the Division improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the winter road maintenance program, including resolving contract management and contractor performance issues, and measuring and meeting the Council-approved service levels.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in collaboration with the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to:

a.  develop mechanisms to assess the outcomes of the Affordable Home Ownership Program, including the extent to which the Program is effectively contributing towards the City's housing priorities; and, in doing so, the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, should also review and implement the relevant outstanding recommendations from its 2012 study; and

b.  consider and recommend enhancements or adjustments to the Affordable Home Ownership Program and/or level of funding, if outcomes are not being effectively achieved through the Program in its current form.

2.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to define the targeted level of housing affordability it aims to provide through its Affordable Home Ownership Program and give consideration to:

a.  aligning the definition with other municipal/provincial definitions;

b.  setting limits on gross debt service ratios for eligibility; and

c.  establishing maximum purchase price limits that are at, or below, the average market values for that unit type/size and that will support the City's desired level of affordability.

3.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to analyze the extent to which the Affordable Home Ownership Program has helped households in purchasing homes that are affordable to them (i.e., whether or not loan recipients meet the targeted level of housing affordability); and this analysis should, in turn, be considered when assessing the overall impact of funding on the achievement of housing objectives and outcomes.

4.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to confirm that the information households provide for loan eligibility purposes is consistent with what they submit to their third-party lenders who assess whether the purchasers can carry the cost of ownership when approving them for a primary mortgage; this will help better assess if they have included all income and asset sources, particularly where they appear to have exceeded the targeted level of housing affordability.

5.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to pursue measures related to ongoing affordability that the City should implement; and this could include:

a.  pursuing legislative changes for ongoing affordability outside of the Planning Act (i.e., to allow the City to enter into housing agreements with ongoing affordability conditions like tenure of housing and resale price restrictions that can be registered on title); and

b.  considering other non-legislative options to offer ongoing affordability, including exercising the option to purchase terms on resale.

6.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to:

a.  require proponents to track and report the reasons why loan discharges and/or unit resales have occurred; this information should be used when assessing the overall impact of funding; and

b.  obtain and review calculations and supporting documents for loan and capital appreciation repayments to the City to ensure that amounts calculated by proponents and repaid to the City are accurate and reasonable.

7.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to pursue changes to Affordable Home Ownership Program requirements that will support prioritization of affordable home ownership opportunities and funding based on local needs and City priorities; in setting priorities, the City should consider collecting data on the types of applicants who applied to/expressed interest in opportunities at affordable home ownership developments; and, in doing so, the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, should consult with key stakeholders, including proponents, and consider best practices from other jurisdictions to ensure any changes support intended program outcomes.

8.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to implement enhanced program guidelines to ensure that loan recipients meet the spirit of the Affordable Home Ownership Program; and this may include:

a.  limits on assets. This should consider purchasers' bank and investment balances and the amount of personal funds available to pay for deposits, down payments, and/or upgrades;

b.  a minimum number of years where applicants must demonstrate they meet income requirements. Income documentation should be as current as possible to reflect applicants' true financial pictures at the time of application; income requirements should also consider and address circumstances where there are changes to household composition or income after the time of application;

c.  restrictions on residency, whereby applicants who are currently living in Toronto prior to applying are prioritized; and

City Council request that, in enhancing the above guidelines, the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, should consult with key stakeholders, including proponents, and consider best practices from other jurisdictions to ensure that any changes best support intended program outcomes.

9.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to:

a.  ensure that future Affordable Home Ownership Program delivery agreements are clear on the number of modest units at affordable prices proponents are expected to provide. Targets should reflect the level of affordability that the City intends to create and the amount of loan funding allocated to the development should support this objective;

b.  improve monitoring of proponent sales of affordable units and the issuance of loans in order to more proactively address challenges in creating the expected number of affordable home ownership opportunities. Where proponents do not achieve targets, the City should assess the root causes and determine if program adjustments are required as part of its overall program evaluation; and

c.  improve the timeliness with which unused funding for affordable home ownership loans is returned to the City so that it can be made available to better support other housing opportunities and priorities.

10.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to implement a formally documented review process to ensure that:

a.  all applicant, unit eligibility, ongoing occupancy, and other delivery agreement requirements for the Affordable Home Ownership Program have been met. Loan files should be reviewed for any discrepancies between documents (i.e., to ensure that information reported between documents is consistent) and appropriate follow-up action, in collaboration with proponents, should be taken to ensure that eligibility requirements have been met; and

b.  information provided by proponents on semi-annual reports is accurate and consistent with loan files submitted. To allow for effective program evaluation, reports should capture all loan sources, including amounts provided directly by proponents.

11.  City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to:

a.  provide enhanced guidance on how proponents should validate and document that income, legal status, residential tenancy, and other delivery agreement requirements for the Affordable Home Ownership Program have been met (i.e., what documents to obtain and review); and

b.  provide guidance on what proponents should be looking for when reviewing eligibility documentation and how to properly document and follow up on any discrepancies noted.

The Auditor General, the Senior Audit Manager, Auditor General's Office, and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, gave a presentation on Strengthening Accountability and Outcomes for Affordable Housing: Understanding the Impact of the Affordable Home Ownership Program.

This report presents the results of the Auditor General's review of the City's affordable home ownership program (the "Program"). The Program has been a long-standing initiative in the City's affordable housing strategy. Over the last decade, the Program's goals have included assisting low and moderate-income renters in Toronto to purchase affordable homes and realize the benefits of home ownership.

The audit focuses on assessing the extent to which City's Program is achieving the City's housing objectives to help low and moderate-income households achieve home ownership.

The City's affordable home ownership program is part of its response to addressing the housing needs in Toronto. Our audit makes 11 recommendations that will help position the Housing Secretariat to refresh how it manages the Program to achieve the results intended by City Council. It identifies ways they can strengthen accountability and deliver on their objectives and expected outcomes by:

1.  Assessing the extent to which the Program is achieving housing objectives and outcomes

2.  Supporting Program intent by strengthening Program design

3.  Promoting consistent and impactful outcomes through enhanced City oversight

The Audi Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council request the City Manager to forward the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General, on as needed basis, to selected Agencies and Corporations and request that they review and consider implementing similar controls recommended in this report that are relevant to their respective organizations.

2.  City Council request the Controller, in consultation with the Benefits Plan Administrator, the Chief People Officer, and the City Solicitor, to undertake a review of dental benefit plan coverages and industry standards and best practices to consider opportunities for changes to the City's coverage to provide cost effective dental benefits; and a process should be established for:

a.  consultation, on a periodic basis, with industry experts and the Benefits Plan Administrator to identify industry standards and acceptable practices for dental benefits coverage limits, particularly in areas where use by the City's plan members is significantly higher than industry standards or benchmarks; and

 
b.  recommending reasonable maximum plan coverages for the appropriate services, such as the benchmark averages provided by the Benefits Plan Administrator and examples provided by the Auditor General; consideration for special circumstances should be provided, where necessary; and the identified cost saving opportunities should also be considered for other benefit plans and implemented across the City and its Agencies and Corporations.

3.  City Council request the Controller, in consultation with the Benefits Plan Administrator, to review the identified exceptions and select the instances (outliers) that require a detailed review, including obtaining records from the service providers. Results of the review to be documented for corrective actions. These actions may include:

a.  recovery of cost where applicable;

b.  communicating instances with practitioners/service providers and patients; and

c.  identifying potential new systematic controls and developing management information reports for ongoing monitoring; and any findings and realized savings should be documented to inform future Benefit Plan design.

4.  City Council request the Controller, in consultation with the Benefits Plan Administrator, to develop an information guide and online training for plan members to understand their dental plan coverage and common dental treatment services and related fees. Plan members should be advised to review and assess the fees charged for their services at the time of each visit.

5.  City Council request the Director, Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits, in consultation with the Chief People Officer and the City Solicitor, to explore introducing co-pays for the dental and health benefits at the respective joint union-management benefit committees and explore introducing co-pays for the dental and health benefits for the non-union/management benefits plan.

The Audit Committee considered Items AU6.1 and AU6.4 together.

The Auditor General gave a presentation on Employee Health Benefits Fraud Involving a Medical Spa, as it pertains to Item AU6.1.

The objective of the Continuous Controls Monitoring Program is to use data analytics techniques to provide reports for management to proactively monitor financial transactions, detect unusual expenses and identify areas where internal controls could be strengthened.

The City of Toronto (City) provides extended health and dental benefits coverage to its employees and retirees, their spouses and eligible dependents in accordance with City policies and collective agreements. In 2019 the City spent $152 million to provide employee health benefits. Dental benefits amounted to $51.9 million.

Testing of controls to ensure claims are reasonable and legitimate and reviewing plan design provides assurance to City Council that the City is receiving the best value. We did not conduct an audit, but used extensive data analytics techniques combined with selective testing to form an assessment of how the City is doing in this area. We followed-up all observations with the plan administrator and discussed with the management to form our assessment.

What we found:

Overall, we found the plan administrator has good controls in place. 

1.  Pension, Payroll and Employee Benefits Division (PPEB) has followed the AG's past recommendations to include strong upfront controls for benefits management.

2.  Controls appear to be working.

3.  Although we identified some claims would benefit from further review, nothing came to our attention that would suggest fraud. Our findings are consistent with an independent third-party audit conducted by PPEB.

4.  Where we identified some claims for a deeper review, in some cases the plan administrator had already picked up the items for review themselves. This is good news and it provides us with confidence that the controls are in place and operating.

5.  Employees would benefit by having better training on using benefits and how to verify services being charged by dentists. Enhancing the continuous review of trends and expenses using advanced data analytics will help to control costs. These measures will continue on a go-forward basis to help ensure the long-term sustainability of plan.

There are also opportunities for savings.

We have identified cost saving opportunities through analyzing data and benchmarking with other levels of government. The City should consider:

1.  exploring plan design changes, such as, harmonization of benefit plans among various groups of staff for major dental services.

2.  having annual maximum allowable amounts on basic and comprehensive dental services categories.

3.  when negotiating future employment agreements, whether there is an opportunity to reduce dental costs by establishing some co-insurance payments by plan members. This measure appears to be in line with other public service plans. The savings could be further enhanced if these measures are extended to other health benefits and across the City Agencies and Corporations.

Our recommendations are related to the following three areas:

1.  Exploring options for plan design changes to reduce the dental benefit costs.
The City pays 100 percent of basic and comprehensive basic dental procedures. We have identified cost saving opportunities, for example, considering co-insurance payments by plan members and having annual maximum allowable amounts on dental services.

2.  Improving controls through ongoing review of atypical benefit claims.  
Enhancing the continuous review of trends and expenses using advanced data analytics would help control costs. These measures will continue to help ensure the long-term sustainability of the benefit plans.

3.  Improving awareness among City plan members of dental services and related charges.
This will help plan members understand their dental coverage and common dental services and related fees. An informed review by plan members of the charges billed by practitioners will complement other recommended controls.  

We have made four recommendations. Implementation of the recommended changes discussed in this report could result in significant annual savings. We have provided potential savings in various plan design change scenarios. The realized savings will be reported after plan design changes are evaluated and implemented.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council receive the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General for information.

The Auditor General reviews the implementation status of outstanding audit recommendations, and reports the review results to City Council through the Audit Committee.

As of September 30, 2020, there were 749 outstanding recommendations, 296 were identified as high priority.

This year, our Office implemented a new audit management technology solution designed for auditors to manage all aspects of the audit. As an extension to the new system, we integrated continuous tracking of the implementation status of audit recommendations. The new technology will improve the efficiency and timeliness of how we collect information from management for the follow-up reviews.

This report describes the new follow-up process and the Auditor General's plan to restart the follow-up work beginning November 2020.

The Audit Committee recommends that: 

1.  City Council receive the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General for information.

The Auditor General undertakes a risk-based approach to audit selection. To identify audit priorities for her Audit Work Plan, every five years the Auditor General performs an extensive risk assessment of the operations of the City divisions and its major agencies and corporations included in her mandate. The results of the Auditor General's last city-wide risk assessment were reported in 2015. In accordance with the Auditor General's 2020 Audit Work Plan, the Auditor General initiated a city-wide risk and opportunity assessment in early 2020.

The purpose of the Auditor General's city-wide risk and opportunity assessment is to inform the development of her risk-based Audit Work Plan. It helps to ensure that all significant areas of the City are evaluated from an audit risk perspective by using uniform criteria to identify areas that may warrant audit attention. Determining which areas to audit and the appropriate allocation of audit resources is essential in maximizing the value of an effective audit process.

The Auditor General's 2020 city-wide risk and opportunity assessment is still underway and the purpose of this report is to inform the Audit Committee of progress to date.

In 2020, the Auditor General's city-wide risk and opportunity assessment also includes the Toronto Public Library and Toronto Police Service. Both of these Boards have requested the Auditor General to perform this assessment. The proposed risk-based audit plans will be reported to their separate Boards in October/November 2020, before they are presented to the City Audit Committee. We would like to include any emerging higher risk audit areas in the Auditor General's 2021 Audit Work Plan which will be presented to Audit Committee in November 2020. The potential audit projects that can be completed will be subject to available resourcing.

We plan to report our preliminary results as part of the Auditor General's 2021 Audit Work Plan with additional updates next year.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council receive the report (October 6, 2020) from the Auditor General for information.

This report provides the Auditor General's findings from reviewing the 2018 sale of a property at 260 Eighth Street in Etobicoke, Ontario (the Property). This review was initiated based on concerns brought forward by a complainant in relation to the sale of the Property. They included that the sale amount of the Property was less than market value, the approval process for the sale of the Property was not conducted in accordance with City guidelines, and the best value for the Property was not attained.

We conducted an investigative review to evaluate whether there was evidence to support concerns of wrongdoing. This does not constitute an audit conducted in accordance with Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS). However, we believe we have performed sufficient work in satisfaction that there was no wrongdoing in this transaction.

The Auditor General's review including hiring a designated professional real estate appraiser to conduct an independent appraisal of the Property. Based on this review, it was concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support a claim that the Property was sold at less than market value.

We also reviewed the process surrounding the special meeting related to this transaction. Proper procedures appear to have been followed in the process, including the notice for and conduct of the special meeting of the Boards of Build Toronto and Toronto Port Lands Company which occurred on April 15, 2019.

Given that the sale price of the Property was at fair market value and the appropriate processes were followed in the notice for and conduct of the special meeting, we decided not to investigate the matter of obtaining the best value for the property by maximizing the number of jobs. It is important to note that during our review, no evidence came to our attention to sufficiently support or refute the job creation numbers by any of the proponents or that would suggest that the Property's successful purchasers are likely to create fewer jobs than other developers.

Finally, there was a question regarding whether late, unsolicited offers received should have been accepted. In our view, it was appropriate for CreateTO to proceed with the agreement it already had in place, considering that fair market value was being received from the successful proponent, as well as the complexity of the transaction and environmental issues on the Property. In addition, it is important for the public to be able to rely on the City's open bidding process.

At its meeting on October 9, 2020, the Board of Directors of CreateTO considered Item RA17.5, Auditor General's Office - Review of 260 Eighth Street Land Transaction.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council receive the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General on the status of the financial statement audits of the City of Toronto's Agencies and Corporations for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee and City Council with the status of financial statement audits of the City's Agencies and Corporations for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council receive for information the 2018 and 2019 Financial Statements and related documents for the years ended December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2019 for the following City of Toronto Agencies:

- Exhibition Place

- Heritage Toronto

- TO Live (formerly operating as the Hummingbird Centre for the Performing Arts, operating as Civic Theatres Toronto)

- Toronto Atmospheric Fund

- Toronto Parking Authority

- Toronto Public Library

- Toronto Transit Commission

- Toronto Zoo

- Yonge-Dundas Square

The Audit Committee:

1.  Received for information the 2019 Financial Statements and related documents for the year ended December 31, 2019 for the following City of Toronto Corporations and Partnered Corporation, having regard that the 2019 Financial Statements and related documents have previously been considered by City Council:

- Build Toronto

- Casa Loma Corporation

- Lakeshore Arena Corporation

- Toronto Community Housing Corporation

- Toronto Hydro Corporation

- Toronto Pan Am Sports Centre Inc.

- Toronto Port Lands Company

The following agencies have submitted 2018 and 2019 Financial Statements and related documents for the years ended December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2019 to the Audit Committee for consideration:

- Exhibition Place

- Heritage Toronto

- TO Live (formerly operating as the Hummingbird Centre for the Performing Arts, operating as Civic Theatres Toronto)

- Toronto Atmospheric Fund

- Toronto Parking Authority

- Toronto Public Library

- Toronto Transit Commission

- Toronto Zoo

- Yonge-Dundas Square

In addition, City Council has received and forwarded the 2019 Financial Statements and related documents for the year ended December 31, 2019 for the following corporations and partnered corporation to the Audit Committee for information:

- Build Toronto

- Casa Loma Corporation

- Lakeshore Arena Corporation

- Toronto Community Housing Corporation

- Toronto Hydro Corporation

- Toronto Pan Am Sports Centre Inc.

- Toronto Port Lands Company

Financial Statements for Exhibition Place for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Financial Statements for Heritage Toronto for the year ended December 31, 2019

Financial Statements for TO Live (formerly operating as the Hummingbird Centre for the Performing Arts, operating as Civic Theatres Toronto) for the years ended December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2019.

Consolidated Financial Statements for the Toronto Atmospheric Fund for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Financial Statements for the Toronto Parking Authority for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Financial Statements for the Toronto Public Library for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Consolidated Financial Statements for the Toronto Transit Commission for the year ended

December 31, 2019.

Financial Statements for the Toronto Zoo for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Financial Statements for Yonge-Dundas Square for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council receive the 2019 audited financial statements of the Arenas attached to the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General.

The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee and City Council with the 2019 audited financial statements of Arenas.

The 2019 audited financial statements for the eight City Arenas are presented to the Audit Committee after approval by their respective Boards or Committees of Management. The external auditor, Welch LLP, advise that where they have comments on internal controls, they would provide these by way of a report to the Board.

The Independent Auditor's Report and accompanying financial statements for the four completed City Arenas are attached to this report. The audits of the remaining four Arenas are in progress at the time of preparation of this report.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council receive the 2019 audited financial statements of the Community Centres attached to the report (October 8, 2020) from the Auditor General.

The purpose of this report is to provide the Audit Committee and City Council with the 2019 audited financial statements of Community Centres.

The 2019 audited financial statements for the 10 Community Centres are presented to Audit Committee after approval by their respective Boards of Management. The external auditor, Welch LLP, advise that they have provided their comments on internal controls to some organizations by way of a report to the Board.

Each Community Centre's Independent Auditor's Report, accompanying financial statements, and internal control letter (where applicable) is attached to this report.

The Audit Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council authorize the Auditor General to award new non-competitive contracts through her pre-qualified roster for IT and cybersecurity audit work, with the aggregate total amount of projects to exceed $500,000 if it is to conduct critical systems cybersecurity work.

The City of Toronto, is increasingly conducting business and key operations using innovative technology solutions. This makes operations more efficient and enhances the delivery of City services to citizens and businesses. However, this comes with increased risk of cyberattacks and data breaches as threat actors are becoming more sophisticated with their attacks.

The Auditor General recognizing the increased risks of cyberattacks has been proactive in performing cybersecurity audits at the City. Performing Information Technology (IT) penetration testing (Pen Testing) and vulnerability assessments (VA) is complex and requires highly trained IT security experts and specialized testing tools and software. Each tester must have a police security clearance to perform assessments on critical technology systems.

In 2019, the Auditor General presented her report "Cyber Safety: A Robust Cybersecurity Program Needed to Mitigate Current and Emerging Threats" at the City Council meeting on October 29 and 30, 2019.

At the meeting the recommendation "City Council request the City Manager, in consultation with the Auditor General, to report by the December 17 and 18, 2019 meeting of City Council on mechanisms required that would enable the Auditor General to conduct risk assessments or investigate cyber security for City Agencies and Corporations not currently within the Auditor General's purview" was adopted.

To mitigate emerging cybersecurity threats the Auditor General increased the number of cybersecurity audits on her workplan. The Auditor General has now sole sourced several work assignments to the Firm that won a competitive bid in 2019 for a cybersecurity audit. We selected this Firm because the only other proponent that bid has since performed consulting work for the City, so there is an independence issue. The selected Firm has the expertise in cybersecurity and provided very competitive rates. The selected Firm is familiar with the current state of City system architecture and this knowledge is key. 

As most of the pre-qualified Firms have expressed little interest on bidding for these assignments, the Auditor General expects to continue to sole source such projects to the Firm. The Auditor General intends to revisit the sole source arrangement during latter half of 2021 to evaluate and determine other procurement choices.   

The Auditor General expects that the aggregate value of all contracts for various technology and cybersecurity audits at the City and its Agencies and Corporations may exceed $500,000 in total. Therefore, the purpose of this report is to keep Audit Committee and Council apprised of the non-competitive nature of these procurements.

The Board of Health recommends that:

1.  City Council urge the Federal and Provincial Governments to mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 on groups that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 by funding and accelerating the implementation of existing strategies related to the social determinants of health, including affordable housing, eliminating homelessness, poverty reduction, food security, overdose prevention, anti-Black racism, and Indigenous health and well-being, as recommended in Attachment 1 to the report (October 14, 2020) from the Medical Officer of Health.

2.   City Council call on the Government of Ontario to increase the availability and accessibility of pop-up COVID-19 testing in neighbourhoods disproportionately affected by the pandemic.

3.  City Council call on the Government of Ontario to:

a.   restore "Pandemic Pay" for frontline workers, which expired in early August 2020, recognizing the ongoing second wave resurgence of COVID-19 cases in Ontario and the continuing risk and sacrifice of frontline workers during the pandemic;

b.  collaborate with partners, including municipalities, to streamline the administrative requirements and delivery of "Pandemic Pay" to frontline workers in a timely manner; and

c.  explore options to recognize public health workers, many of whom are not eligible for "Pandemic Pay", to receive some form of compensation for significant additional hours that will be required on an ongoing basis to respond to the pandemic throughout the winter months.

4.  City Council urge the Ontario Ministry of Health to ensure that the new provincial software, Case and Contact Management (CCM), meets all of the needs of Toronto Public Health, as determined by the Medical Officer of Health, and facilitates cluster identification to target interventions and restrictions.

5.  City Council urge the Ontario Ministry of Health to conduct case control studies using the data collected by public health units across the province to inform decision-making through the pandemic going forward.

6.  City Council direct the City Manager, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health, to make City facilities available for the distribution of the flu shot in the fall of 2020, where they can be safely accommodated, in partnership with the Government of Ontario, including consideration of establishing drive-through flu shot stations.

7.  City Council request the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health, to build on COVID-19 resurgence plans and the findings from the data and consultation with groups that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 to prepare a Toronto COVID-19 Response Equity Action Plan that consolidates existing advice, strategies, and initiatives and includes for each recommendation or action the status, timeline, lead division or agency, and requests of other governments.

8.  City Council request the Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, in consultation with the Medical Officer of Health, to report to the Board of Health in 2020 with an update on the Toronto COVID-19 Response Equity Action Plan in Recommendation 7 above.

The Board of Health:

1.  Called on the Government of Canada, the Government of Ontario, and the City of Toronto to immediately develop COVID-19 Response Equity Action Plans to eliminate the unequal impact of the pandemic experienced by many communities.

2.  Urged the Federal and Provincial Governments to mitigate the impacts of COVID-19 on groups that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19 by funding and accelerating the implementation of existing strategies related to the social determinants of health, including affordable housing, eliminating homelessness, poverty reduction, food security, overdose prevention, anti-Black racism, and Indigenous health and well-being, as recommended in Attachment 1 to the report (October 14, 2020) from the Medical Officer of Health.

3.  Called on the Government of Ontario to increase the availability and accessibility of pop-up COVID-19 testing in neighbourhoods disproportionately affected by the pandemic.

4.  Called on the Government of Ontario to suspend residential evictions throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

5.  Urged the Ontario Ministry of Health to ensure that the new provincial software, Case and Contact Management (CCM), meets all of the needs of Toronto Public Health, as determined by the Medical Officer of Health, and facilitates cluster identification to target interventions and restrictions.

6.  Urged the Ontario Ministry of Health to conduct case control studies using the data collected by public health units across the province to inform decision-making through the pandemic going forward.

7.  Urged the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) to continue to take all possible steps to facilitate safe physical distancing in transit vehicles with priority to services in neighbourhoods with a higher incidence of COVID-19 and requested the Chair, Toronto Board of Health, to communicate the Board's position to the TTC.

8.  Requested the Medical Officer of Health to review and action the full set of recommendations in Attachment 1 to the report (October 14, 2020) from the Medical Officer of Health, as appropriate, including:  

a.  consulting with City divisions and agencies to collaborate with community partners in order to plan and implement the short-term actions listed in Attachment 1 to the report (October 14, 2020) from the Medical Officer of Health, including:

1.  creating more accessible public health information;

2.  building community agency support;

3.  increasing community testing and health access;

4.  advocating for income supports and eviction protection;

5.  supporting effective isolation;

6.  overdose prevention and harm reduction; and

7.  supporting people experiencing homelessness;

b.  consulting with City divisions and agencies to collaborate with community partners in order to plan and implement the long-term actions listed in Attachment 1 to the report (October 14, 2020) from the Medical Officer of Health, including:

1.  comprehensive poverty reduction, including universal guaranteed basic income;

2.  safe, high quality, and affordable housing, including supportive housing;

3.  food security, including access to healthy and culturally appropriate food;

4.  better wages, benefits, and protections for workers, including migrant workers; and

5.  equity for Black and Indigenous communities, as well as other populations that experience systemic discrimination;

c.  collaborating with community organizations and health care partners in developing a "social needs assessment" process with appropriate funding and resources to ensure wrap-around supports;

d.  continuing to release disaggregated COVID-19 socio-demographic data and include information on how the City plans to take action in collaboration with impacted communities; and

e.  conducting additional consultation with the Indigenous Serving Organizations cluster table on the impacts of COVID-19.

9.  Requested the Medical Officer of Health to expand Toronto Public Health's COVID-19 Monitoring Dashboard to include equity indicators that inform decision-making on "reopening" or enhancing public health measures.

The Associate Director, Communicable Disease Control, Toronto Public Health, the Acting Manager, Surveillance and Epidemiology, Toronto Public Health, and the Medical Officer of Health gave a presentation on Response to COVID-19: Update on Resurgence.

At its September 21, 2020 meeting, the Board of Health received a report outlining Toronto Public Health's (TPH) plans for a resurgence of COVID-19 in the fall, including activities and recommendations required to strengthen readiness. Since that time, there has been a significant and marked surge in reported cases, focused among younger individuals who live and/or socialize in downtown neighbourhoods. This demographic shift compared to the first wave, has so far, resulted in limited increases in cases requiring hospitalization mitigating somewhat the strain on health care services. 

As part of the planning for the resurgence, TPH developed or adopted a series of epidemiological methods to gather the evidence for who is being affected by COVID-19, and on the risks identified in those cases for COVID-19 transmission. This report makes recommendations and identifies strategies for a targeted COVID-19 response based on this evidence. A brief outline of methods used to generate this information is also provided.

In addition to this work, at its July 2, 2020 meeting, the Board of Health requested TPH to consult with groups that have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19, identify the impacts being experienced by these groups, and recommend actions for the City of Toronto and its governmental partners to reduce these impacts. During the summer of 2020, TPH staff held a series of consultation sessions with Toronto's 13 COVID-19 Community Cluster tables where over 140 non-profit organizations were represented, including ten regional community tables, the Black Resilience table for African, Caribbean and Black serving organizations and the Indigenous Serving Organizations table. This report includes the recommendations resulting from these consultations. 

Finally, this report also provides updated modelling for the City of Toronto. The most basic indicator that can provide information on the growth of the outbreak is the effective reproductive number R(t). It represents the average number of new cases per current infectious case and is used to predict the growth of the outbreak. Toronto's current R(t) is 1.2, which suggests a significant acceleration of case growth without additional steps to respond and limit transmission.

The Economic and Community Development Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council request the Federal and Provincial Governments to:

a.  work with the City of Toronto prior to re-opening the border to develop a coordinated approach to new refugee claimant arrivals; and

b.  continue to provide temporary accommodation for refugee claimant arrivals at the border or place of entry until they have a permanent housing plan in place.

2.  City Council reiterate its request to the Federal and Provincial Governments to develop a regional response, in advance of the border reopening, to place new refugee claimant arrivals in interim housing where there is capacity.

3.  City Council request the Federal and Provincial Governments to recognize that permanent solutions to ending chronic homelessness are not possible without increased, long-term funding commitments and to provide ongoing, long-term funding for the operating funding needed to meet the City's supportive housing targets of 1,800 new supportive housing units every year for 10 years, as well as the recently-approved 24-month plan to create 1,000 new permanent modular homes, 1,000 new homes through acquisitions, renovations, and "shovel-ready" projects, and 1,000 additional new portable and flexible Canada-Ontario Housing Benefits to help households secure housing available for rent in Toronto and across the region.

4.  City Council request the Provincial Government to ensure that appropriate primary health care, harm reduction, overdose prevention, and mental health services are available to support individuals who are homeless during the pandemic and beyond and to provide the resources required to implement the shelter health services framework developed in partnership with the City of Toronto in 2018 in order to provide a coordinated and consistent approach to health services across the shelter system.

5.  City Council request the Provincial Government to provide ongoing and sustainable funding for the mental health case management and harm reduction supports needed to support individuals experiencing homelessness with complex needs, which the City of Toronto is providing on an interim basis at some temporary response shelter locations to meet immediate needs.

6.  City Council request the Provincial Government to end the practice of discharging individuals directly from provincial health and corrections facilities into homelessness and ensure that all individuals have a housing plan in place upon release and to work with municipalities to coordinate discharge plans to address housing and community safety in advance of release.

7.  City Council urge the Ontario Ministry of Health and the relevant Local Health Integration Networks to provide the necessary resources and supports for proactive, regular, and accessible mobile COVID-19 testing in shelter and respite settings.

8.  City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to receive funding and enter into new or amend existing agreements, subject to the approval of Shelter, Support and Housing Administration's 2021 Operating Budget, to continue to provide the City of Toronto's response for the homelessness service system as outlined in the implementation plan in Attachment 1 to the report (September 28, 2020) from the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration.

9.  City Council approve the 2021 Shelter Infrastructure Plan in Attachment 2 to the report (September 28, 2020) from the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, and authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to enter into new or amend existing agreements, as required, to open and operate shelters outlined in the 2021 Shelter Infrastructure Plan.

10.  City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to enter into new or amend existing agreements, as required, to maintain or add required respite spaces and shelter beds and respond to urgent or unanticipated needs to relocate shelters or 24-hour respite sites and 24-hour drop-ins.

11.  City Council direct the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to continue to deliver an enhanced outreach strategy that focusses on ensuring the safety of those in encampments, increasing opportunities for permanent housing and access to safe indoor spaces, providing essential supports, and that "Streets to Homes" continue to work with interdivisional and community partners on the City's comprehensive approach to encampments using both human rights and public health approaches grounded in evidence-based practices that promote client and community safety.

12.  City Council direct the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to develop plans to rapidly scale up the permanent housing and shelter capacity response for the 2020-2021 winter season, if required for safe physical distancing to accommodate unanticipated demand on the shelter and housing system during the pandemic.

13.  City Council direct the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, in partnership with Corporate Real Estate Services and the Housing Secretariat, to conduct a portfolio review of the existing shelter system to identify existing shelter locations suitable for conversion to supportive housing and provide authority, subject to the approval of Shelter, Support and Housing Administration's 2021 Operating Budget, to use existing shelter operating funding for housing supports at those sites.

14.  City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to convert existing and planned funding through the 1,000 beds initiative to create supportive housing units and report to the Planning and Housing Committee with additional details on a plan to activate and operate affordable and supportive rental housing at these sites, including any requests for Open Door incentives to support the development of the sites.

15.  City Council recognize the importance of preventing people from becoming homeless and request the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to accelerate ongoing work toward the expansion of the Toronto Rent Bank Program and the Eviction Prevention in the Community Program and bring recommendations to City Council as soon as possible.

The General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration gave a presentation on Interim Shelter Recovery and Infrastructure Implementation Plan.

The purpose of this staff report is to bring forward an implementation action plan for the City's COVID-19 response for homelessness services for the next 12 months, as part of critical second wave planning efforts to ensure the shelter system is positioned to respond effectively if there is a resurgence of COVID-19 this fall. The shelter recovery strategy supports the City's broader COVID-19 resurgence plan, which includes supporting vulnerable populations as one of five key priority areas for ensuring preparedness for future resurgences of COVID-19.

The report also provides information on Shelter, Support and Housing Administration's 2021 Shelter Infrastructure Plan. This includes a progress update on Council's direction to add 1,000 new permanent shelter beds and updates on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on planned shelters and how current investments can be leveraged to support recommendations of the Task Force.

The implementation plan is based on learning and experience from the first six months of our pandemic response within the shelter system, and the advice of the Interim Shelter Recovery Task Force convened in partnership with the United Way. During the first wave of COVID-19, system partners have been learning and working together at an accelerated rate to address urgent need. This experience has highlighted that our continued success in effectively responding to COVID-19, and protecting vulnerable individuals in our community, is dependent on the collaboration across the homelessness service sector, strong partnership with the health sector and enhanced regional collaboration.

Through the experience of the past 6 months, it has become clear that the solutions to homelessness and the spread of COVID-19 are one and the same. Safe and adequate housing is the best defense against spread of the virus. It has also become clear that while COVID-19 has affected everyone, it has had a greater impact on those in our community who face greater health inequities, including people experiencing homelessness and housing instability, women experiencing domestic violence, members of the LGBTQ2S+ community, and Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) individuals. Going forward, our recovery strategy needs to consider these social determinates of health and include distinct approaches to confronting systemic barriers and discrimination that increases both the risks of homelessness and the risks to the virus.

The Economic and Community Development Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council direct the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to identify alternative suitable sites for Applegrove Community Complex both within the City's existing portfolio and within possible new redevelopment sites that are located in the Community Complex's service area currently contemplated by either Toronto Community Housing or CreateTO and to identify any other potential properties included within Applegrove's catchment area.

Applegrove Community Complex is a 7,911 square feet Association of Community Centres site which has served the Greenwood-Coxwell area since 1979. Applegrove Community Complex offers community development, family and child, child and youth and adult programming within the catchment area that runs from Jones Avenue to Woodbine Avenue and from Lake Ontario to the Railway tracks north of Gerrard Street. Applegrove Community Complex currently operates out of the Duke of Connaught School at 60 Woodfield Road. Given current and anticipated development projects in the area, including the redevelopment of 1555-1557 Queen Street East and the Housing Now site at 1638 Queen Street East, there is a predicted increase in the number of students in the area, which could create pressure on the ongoing availability of space in the school. The purpose of this report is to report back on the expected impact of these pressures on Applegrove Community Complex's space and present options to ensure more secure tenure in the future. City staff recommend that a permanent site within a City-owned facility should be identified for Applegrove Community Complex.

The Economic and Community Development Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council direct the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, to extend the pilot program and report on the results of the new Local Employment Requirement of the Imagination, Manufacturing, Innovation and Technology (IMIT) program by the fourth quarter of 2022.

In June 2019, City Council directed the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, to implement a points-based system to assist recipients of the Imagination, Manufacturing, Innovation and Technology (IMIT) incentive in meeting the Local Employment Requirement of the program. Council further directed staff to report back on the results of the first year of this pilot program by the fourth quarter of 2020 and, based on results, consider implementing changes on a permanent basis.

This report provides an update on steps taken to develop and apply the points-based system. It also explains how the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the implementation of these employment plans by IMIT recipients and their tenants, and the ability of staff to report on process and outcomes. The report recommends that City Council extend the timeline for staff to report back on the pilot program results.

By extending the trial period during which these results can be assessed, staff and Council will be in a better position to identify opportunities for further improvement.

The Economic and Community Development Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council authorize the Fire Chief and General Manager, Toronto Fire Services, to exercise the additional optional five separate one-year renewal terms with Innotex Inc., at the discretion of the Fire Chief and General Manager, Toronto Fire Services, for the supply and delivery of firefighter's Structural Bunker Suits.

2.  City Council request the Fire Chief and General Manager, Toronto Fire Services, and the Chief Procurement Officer to report to the Economic and Community Development Committee at the end of 2022 with an update on the social procurement aspects of the contract with Innotex Inc. for the provision of firefighter's Structural Bunker Suits.

The purpose of this report is to request authority from City Council for the Fire Chief and General Manager, Toronto Fire Services (TFS), to exercise the optional five (5) separate one (1) year periods with Innotex Inc., in accordance with the terms and conditions as set out in the Request for Proposal 3806-15-0012 for the provision of firefighter's Structural Bunker Suits with a potential cost over the five (5) option years of $6,874,119 net of HST recoveries.

At its January 31, 2017 meeting, City Council authorized the Fire Chief and General Manager, Toronto Fire Services, to negotiate and enter into an agreement with Innotex Inc. (Innotex), being the highest overall scoring proponent meeting the requirements of Request for Proposal (RFP) for the supply and delivery of firefighter's Structural Bunker Suits for five (5) years from the date of award to December 31, 2021, with the option to renew the contract, at the discretion of the Economic and Community Development Committee, with the consideration of including the Social Procurement Policy, if applicable, into the renewals for an additional optional five (5) separate one (1) year periods.

The City's Social Procurement Policy (SPP) was in the development stage during the RFP process and consequently the RFP did not include the provisions that would eventually be outlined in the SPP. The SPP was adopted by City Council on May 3, 4, and 5, 2016 and came into effect as of January 1, 2017. The City reached out to Innotex Inc., who has, in the spirit of the SPP, committed to engage organizations or agencies in their region to develop, implement, and maintain a program to help people experiencing economic hardship.

It is critical for the Division to have the option of exercising the additional five (5) separate renewal terms to ensure the existing contract is in place for the continued supply and delivery of Structural Bunker Suits. The absence of a contract is not an option as it would significantly risk the health and safety of firefighters.

The Economic and Community Development Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council request the Government of Canada to ensure that adequate financial support continues to be accessible for self-employed and gig workers.

The Economic and Community Development Committee:

1.  Referred Toronto Music Advisory Committee Recommendation 2 to the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, for consideration as part of the implementation of the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild (TORR) report.

2.  Requested the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, to explore developing further online resources for artists through the Toronto Music Office, Film and Entertainment Industries, and report to the next meeting of the Toronto Music Advisory Committee.

3.  Requested the Toronto Music Office, Film and Entertainment Industries, to consult with the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, and the Medical Officer of Health to explore how the City of Toronto's COVID-19 shelter, housing, and Toronto Public Health response could align with the Toronto Music Advisory Committee's efforts to support live music venues and musicians.

4.  Requested the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, to report to the Toronto Music Advisory Committee on recent changes to support for the self-employed, including the extension of the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy.

At its meeting on September 24, 2020, the Toronto Music Advisory Committee considered Item MA6.1, Support for Artists. 

The Economic and Community Development Committee recommends that:

1.  City Council request the Government of Canada to develop a permanent Canadian Live Music Fund to stimulate event activity and ensure the future viability and success of Canada's live music sector and drive economic impact.

2.  City Council request the Government of Ontario to:

a.  provide long-term financial support for live music venues and music companies working in live music;

b.  apply fair and more flexible reopening guidelines established for other businesses and venues to live music venues, while ensuring all necessary and rigorous health protocols are accounted for and in place;

c.  convene a meeting to discuss insurance concerns from live music venues; and

d.  institute an immediate ban on evictions for music businesses.

3.  City Council make permanent the inclusion of live music venues as a category of the Creative Co-Location Facilities Tax Subclass.

4.  City Council request the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, to report to the next meeting of the Toronto Music Advisory Committee on the feasibility of spearheading a group insurance program for live music venues with industry organizations such as the Canada Live Music Association.

At its meeting on September 24, 2020, the Toronto Music Advisory Committee considered Item MA6.2, Current Impacts on Live Music Venues.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the Chief Technology Officer, subject to budget approval, to renegotiate and renew the contracts listed in Appendices B and C to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Chief Technology Officer and the Chief Procurement Officer, for a period of up to five (5) years from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2025, for a maximum estimated amount of $169,353,022, net of Harmonized Sales Tax ($172,333,635 net of Harmonized Sales Tax recoveries), subject to recommendation 2.

2. City Council authorize the appropriate City Division Heads and the Chief Technology Officer to negotiate, enter into and execute new contracts or to renew and extend existing contracts identified in Appendices B and C to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Chief Technology Officer and the Chief Procurement Officer, and any ancillary documents required to give effect thereto, for a period of up to five (5) years from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2025, in accordance with City policies and procedures, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

The General Government and Licensing Committee:

1. Requested the City Manager to report to the General Government and Licensing Committee by the second quarter of 2021 on progress to extricate the City from, and avoided entering into, contracts which provide few practical ongoing alternatives but to continue with existing vendors.

The purpose of this report is to seek authority to renegotiate and renew to maximize City interest of 186 non-competitive contracts for maintenance of proprietary technology (which includes software, hardware, and subscriptions), supporting City services identified in Appendix B and C of this report, for the five (5) year period from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2025. This maintenance is required to maintain the City's Strategic Plan of a Well-Run City.  The estimated total value of renewing these contracts during this period is up to $169,353,022, net of Harmonized Sales Tax ($172,333,635 net of Harmonized Sales Tax recoveries). As the City reviews modernization of services, Technology Services is reviewing opportunities to limit dependencies on proprietary technology resulting in digitization of government through utilization of best practice standards and platforms such as enterprise customer relationship management tools for call centres.

The contracts listed in Appendix B and C are renewed annually to ensure support for the business solutions  pertaining to hardware and software applications, many of which are critical to the day-to-day operations of the City and can only be provided by the vendors identified therein because of Exclusive Rights. These renewals will cover the City's most critical and functional enterprise-wide systems and divisional or service specific applications supported by various technology solution providers.

Appendix B includes 121 contracts for maintenance of proprietary technology supporting City services that were previously reported to Council in 2015, 2016 and 2017 under GM8.8, GM16.7, and GM23.9 respectively. Appendix C includes 65 new contracts for maintenance of proprietary technology supporting City services that are now being reported to Council.

City Council approval is required in accordance with Municipal Code Chapter 195- Purchasing, where the current request exceeds the Chief Purchasing Official's authority of the cumulative five year commitment for each vendor, under Article 7, Section 195-7.3 (D) of the Purchasing By-Law or exceeds the threshold of $500,000 net of Harmonized Sales Tax allowed under staff authority as per the Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 71- Financial Control, Section 71-11A.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council receive the report (September 21, 2020) from the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration for information.

On July 28, 2020, through Item No. GL14.11, City Council approved the acquisition of 2950 and 2970 Lake Shore Boulevard West for use as a municipal shelter. Council also requested that the General Manager, Shelter, Support, Housing and Administration consider co-locating permanent housing on the site and report back to the General Government and Licensing Committee.

This report is for information purposes, and responds to Council's request to report back to General Government and Licensing Committee. This report includes information of preliminary results of a feasibility study on co-locating permanent housing on-site with the approved shelter service, and provides an overview of an accelerated community engagement process to work with the local community, Ward Councillor and other stakeholders to ensure the success of the future development. Additionally, the report highlights the range of community services near the properties and outlines how the Shelter, Support, Housing and Administration division will work with local service providers.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the City to enter into a lease agreement (the "Lease") pursuant to the Community Space Tenancy Policy with Midaynta Community Services for a five year term, with such revisions thereto and on such other or amended terms and conditions acceptable to the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services, or their designate and in a form acceptable to the City Solicitor.

2. City Council authorize the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services, or their designate, to administer and manage the Community Space Tenancy leases with Midaynta Community Services set out in Appendix A to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Social Development, Finance and Administration, and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, including the provision of any amendments, consents, approvals, waivers, notices, and notices of termination, provided that the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services may, at any time, refer consideration of such matters (including their content) to City Council for its determination and direction.

3. City Council grant an exemption to the Community Space Tenancy Policy to allow Midaynta Community Services to lease space at 1652 Keele Street without the need to solicit a Request for Expression of Interest as required by the Community Space Tenancy Policy.

4. City Council pass a By-law pursuant to Section 252 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, providing authority to:

a. enter into a Municipal Capital Facility Agreement with Midaynta Community Services for the property known as 1652 Keele Street, with respect to approximately 393 square feet (250 dedicated and 143 of proportionate share of common area) of community space (the "Leased Premises"), for the purposes of providing a Municipal Capital Facility related to the provision of social and health services; and

b. exempt the Leased Premises from taxation for municipal and school purposes, with the tax exemption being effective from the latest of: (1) the commencement date of the Lease, (2) the date the Municipal Capital Facility Agreement is entered into, and (3) the date the Tax Exemption By-law is enacted.

5. City Council amend Schedule A of By-law 1762-2019 (a by-law authorizing the entering into of an agreement for the provision of a municipal capital facility by For Youth Initiative) to replace "3,632 square feet" with "5,698 square feet".

6. City Council direct the City Clerk to give written notice of the By-laws respecting Midaynta Community Services and For Youth Initiative to the Minister of Finance, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, the Toronto District School Board, the Toronto Catholic District School Board, le Conseil Scolaire Viamonde, and le Conseil Scolaire Catholique MonAvenir.

Midaynta Community Services is a non-profit organization that provides settlement services and social cultural programs to improve the quality of life for newcomers, immigrants and youths.   Midaynta Community Services has over 25 years of experience in community development, capacity building and service provision within the Somali Canadian community. Since 2016, Midaynta Community Services has partnered with Somali Immigrant Aid Organization, the current tenant at 1652 Keele Street, and successfully collaborated on various initiatives affecting the Somali Canadian community. Together, they have utilized the space at 1652 Keele Street to provide gang prevention, mentoring programs and settlement services to youth, families and the general community in the York-South Weston neighbourhood.

The purpose of this report is to obtain City Council authority to enter into a five (5) year lease agreement under the Community Space Tenancy Policy for approximately 393 square feet of space located at 1652 Keele Street in Ward 5 York South‑Weston and to have the leased premises designated as a Municipal Capital Facility. Additionally, this report is seeking Council approval to grant the lease to Midaynta Community Services, the sister agency of the original lease holder, Somali Immigrant Aid Organization. The change of lease holder requires approval of an exemption to the Community Space Tenancy Policy to allow Midaynta Community Services to lease space at 1652 Keele Street without undertaking a Request for Expression of Interest process. This exemption would allow Midaynta Community Services with over 25 years of service provision with Somali Immigrant Aid to continue to provide programming at 1652 Keele Street to support racialized youth and their families without any interruption of services to the community.

Finally, this report recommends a correction to the Municipal Capital Facility designation of For Youth Initiative, Item GL10.7 approved by City Council on December 17, 2019. For Youth Initiative is another tenant at 1652 Keele Street. It assists young persons to identify and reach their personal goals, graduate high school, enroll in post-secondary education, gain employment and achieve independence. The 3,632 square feet designated by By-law 1762-2019 did not include For Youth Initiative's share of the common space, 2,066 square feet, for a total of 5,698 square feet.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation, to enter into a fair market-value Long-Term Land Lease based on the terms and conditions outlined in Attachment 2 to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, as amended by Recommendation 2 below, with the principals of the Tamil Community Centre (which is expected to be named "Tamil Community Centre"), to design, build, finance and operate a new not-for-profit Community Recreation Facility on the south parcel of the City-owned property at 311 Staines Road, as shown and outlined on Attachment 1 to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, and on such other terms and conditions to be agreed between the parties, as may be approved by the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

2. City Council amend the conditions outlined in Attachment 2 to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management to read that, Prior to commencing construction, the Tamil Community Centre shall provide a security deposit to the City in an amount equal to up to 50 percent of the budgeted value of construction for the Project, with the amount to be determined at the sole discretion of the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to protect the City should the development not take place as contemplated; such security shall be reduced as work is completed and once the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management is satisfied that all amounts owing to contractors, suppliers, trades and subtrades have been paid in full; and the security deposit shall be in the form of cash, certified cheque or an irrevocable and unconditional Letter of Credit from a major Canadian bank, in the form required by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer, and satisfactory to the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services and shall be delivered to the City, upon issuance of any building permit.

3. City Council direct that the Tamil Community Centre shall be responsible for any and all amounts and costs payable with respect to any claim or litigation with respect to the change in use of the Subject Property, from a naturalized state to a new community centre, to be secured by an irrevocable and unconditional Letter of Credit in the amount of Five Million ($5,000,000.00) Dollars from a major Canadian bank, in the form required by the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer upon request of the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management.

4. City Council direct that within (5) five years of the commencement date of the lease, the tenant shall deliver to the landlord, documentation as required by the landlord, and to the complete satisfaction of the landlord, confirming the tenant's financial standing with respect of the project, including all fundraising and grant commitments received for the Project.

5. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture, and the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation, to enter into a Community Access Agreement to accompany the Land Lease authorized by Recommendation 1 above.

6. City Council direct the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO, to consult with the Executive Director, Social Development Finance and Administration and the Director, Indigenous Affairs Office on how to ensure that the Community Access Agreement is developed to best meet the needs of vulnerable and Indigenous communities.

7. City Council direct the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer, CreateTO and the Director, Indigenous Affairs Office, to report back on the feasibility of how any agreements may include requirements for Indigenous placemaking and how this would be incorporated into any redevelopment of the Subject Property.

8. With respect to restricting the lands to a naturalized state, City Council grant an exemption for the south parcel, and provide its consent and authority to permit the Land Lease on the terms and conditions as set out in Attachment 2 to the report (September 21, 2020) rom the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, as amended by Recommendation 2 above, Community Access Agreement and any related agreements for the new Community Recreation facility.

The City-owned 311 Staines Road comprises a north parcel and south parcel, separated by a Hydro corridor, which was acquired by the City in 2007, with the provision that the lands be restricted to a naturalized state. The purpose of this report is to provide an update to City Council on the non-binding discussions between staff and the principals of the Tamil Community Centre regarding a proposed land lease (the "Land Lease") for the south parcel of 311 Staines Road (the "Subject Property"). The principals of Tamil Community Centre have proposed a new community centre on the Subject Property which will serve the community as a whole, while providing a focus on serving the Tamil community in particular. 

The Tamil community has been working for some time to identify a location within Northeast Scarborough in order to build a new community centre with the goal to address the gap in services available to the broader Tamil community. The proposed location of the new Tamil Community Centre at the Subject Property is ideally located to serve the immediate community along with the broader Tamil communities in Pickering, Ajax and Markham.

In addition, the proposed community centre will work to incorporate the needs of community members at large, who would be able to access and use this facility through a Community Access Agreement which will work as a companion document to the Land Lease. This area is home to a large number of new immigrant families, single parent households, and/or individuals with socio-economic barriers. Communities including Indigenous, Black and Caribbean communities confront similar difficulties in terms of travel time to access vital services, a lack of recreational services, neighbourhood improvement projects, and affordable spaces for community and cultural events. The Tamil Community Centre will be a valuable resource to improve vital services to all communities in the surrounding neighbourhoods.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:  

1. City Council authorize the City of Toronto to enter into a Lease Amending Agreement with New Frontiers Aboriginal Residential Corporation and Frontiers Foundation Incorporated for the property at 419-425 Coxwell Avenue, substantially on the following major terms and conditions as described in Appendix A to the report (September 21, 2020) rom the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, and such other or amended terms and conditions as may be acceptable to the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

2. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, or their designate, in consultation with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to consent, solely in their capacity as landlord, to the re-financing of 419-425 Coxwell Avenue by the New Frontiers Aboriginal Residential Corporation and Frontiers Foundation Incorporated above the outstanding principal of the initial leasehold mortgage. 

3. City Council individually authorize each of the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services, and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, or their designates, to execute the Lease Amending Agreement referenced in Recommendation 1 above and any related documents on behalf of the City of Toronto, as required.

The purpose of this report is to seek authority to amend the existing Ground Lease Agreement at 419-425 Coxwell Avenue, between the City of Toronto and New Frontiers Aboriginal Residential Corporation dated January 26, 2002, enabling the tenant to obtain refinancing to redevelop their property. This residential property currently provides 74 affordable rental units and financial restructuring will allow the tenant to construct 12 additional affordable rental units.

In July 2018, City Council authorized this affordable housing project as a part of Open Door Program's competitive call for affordable rental housing applications. The project supports Open Door Program's objectives and supports the City's efforts to achieve targets of approving 5,000 affordable rental and 2,000 affordable ownership homes for low- and moderate-income residents by 2020.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:  

1. City Council authorize an extension of the existing lease with 1569483 Ontario Incorporated, operating as Toronto Island Marina, for a term of approximately five (5) years, terminating July 31, 2030.

2. City Council authorize the City to enter into, and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management to sign on behalf of the City, a lease extension agreement (the "Agreement") with 1569483 Ontario Incorporated, operating as Toronto Island Marina, substantially on the terms of the existing lease agreement, including re-negotiated base and percentage rent increases, and on such other additional or amended terms and conditions, as may be acceptable to the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

Toronto Island Marina (the "Marina") is leasing approximately 27.58 acres within Toronto Island Park from the City of Toronto (the "City") pursuant to a lease dated October 15, 2005 (the "Marina Lease"), currently expiring on October 14, 2025. The Marina, through 2446157 Ontario Corporation, carrying on business as Blockhouse Bay Management Co., is party to a management agreement dated January 1, 2015 with the Island Yacht Club (the "Management Agreement"), pursuant to which Island Yacht Club has transferred all management control over Island Yacht Club's operations.

This report seeks authority to extend the Marina Lease by a term of approximately five (5) years, to July 31, 2030. This extension would bring the term of the Marina Lease in-line with the term of the Council directed Management Agreement, which recognizes the integrated relationship of both interests.

The extension of the Marina Lease will allow the Marina to secure financing in order to meet the ongoing capital investment required by the Marina under the terms of the Management Agreement between itself and the Island Yacht Club.

In 2014, City Council granted permission allowing the Island Yacht Club to enter into the Management Agreement, allowing the Island Yacht Club to meet its ongoing financial obligations to the City while providing an opportunity to increase its membership numbers. The recommendations approved by Council in 2014 included a five (5) year term extension to the existing lease between the City (as Landlord) and the Island Yacht Club (as Tenant) authorizing a new lease termination date of July 31, 2030. Given the urgency in drafting and executing the Management Agreement, authority for an extension to the Marina Lease was omitted, which this report now seeks to address.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to execute a lease agreement with each of the current and future (if vacancies occur during the term) media tenants of the Press Gallery at City Hall, substantially on the major terms and conditions set out in Appendix A to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, and including such other terms as deemed appropriate by the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

The purpose of this report is to seek authority to enter into lease agreements with ten (10) media tenants of the Press Gallery at City Hall (collectively, the "Press Gallery Tenants") for a term of five (5) years, commencing January 1, 2019 and ending on December 31, 2023, with an option to extend for an additional term of five (5) years.

In 2009, City Council authorized entering into leases with media tenants at below market rent based on the full recovery of the operating costs and realty taxes payable in respect of the Press Gallery. Given that these leases have since expired, this report provides advice to City Council in respect of entering into lease agreements with media tenants of the Press Gallery at a rental rate which attains the full cost recovery of operating this space, in alignment with prior Council direction.

The General Government and Licensing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services, and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to execute the ground lease with the Scarborough Health Network on behalf of the City of Toronto, substantially on the amended terms outlined in Attachment 2 to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, or on such other terms and conditions as may be acceptable to the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services, and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, and in a form acceptable to the City Solicitor.

The purpose of this report is to seek City Council authorization to amend certain terms set out in Item EX28.15 – Lease Agreements with Scarborough Rouge Hospital and the YMCA of Greater Toronto for the Development of the Bridletowne Community Hub (the "2017 report"), considered by the Executive Committee on October 24, 2017 and adopted by City Council on November 7, 8 and 9, 2017.

The 2017 Report authorized the City to enter into ground leases with the Scarborough Rough Hospital, now Scarborough Health Network, and the YMCA of Greater Toronto, on the terms and conditions set out in the 2017 Report, for the northerly portion of 1251 Bridletowne Circle for the development of the Bridletowne Community Hub.

Following the adoption of the recommendations in the 2017 Report, various circumstances have impacted the Project roadmap, which necessitated changes to a number of the Project's elements including, but not limited to, revisions to the Site Plan and key dates. As a result, the terms and conditions of the ground lease with the Scarborough Health Network must be amended. These amendments, if authorized, will allow the Project to proceed while ensuring flexibility in future uses in support of the City-building objectives.

The Infrastructure and Environment Committee recommends that:  

1. City Council approve the Freight and Goods Movement Strategy in Attachment 2 to the report (September 22, 2020) from the General Manager, Transportation Services.

2. City Council forward the report (September 22, 2020) from the General Manager, Transportation Services to the Toronto Police Services Board and request the Board to work with the General Manger, Transportation Services to explore opportunities to enhance commercial vehicle enforcement and inspections to uphold safety standards.

3. City Council request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning in consultation with the General Manager, Transportation Services, and in consultation with freight industries, to:

a. explore the use of regional drop yards to improve freight distribution operations;

b. update guidelines for loading and unloading areas in new commercial and residential developments to address current freight and goods movement practices;

c. further develop freight specific land use policies to support freight and goods movement and ensure the long-term viability of major goods movement facilities and corridors; and

d. explore the use of urban consolidation centres to reduce heavy truck movement at peak times and enhance opportunity for greater utilization of active transportation modes, and request CreateTO to explore business arrangements for use of appropriate city owned or leased land for use as urban consolidation centres.

4. City Council request the Toronto Parking Authority Board to explore business arrangements with courier companies to pilot the use of delivery vans as mobile pick-up and drop-off locations in repurposed parking lots.

5. City Council request the Ontario Ministry of Transportation to review and revise the Ministry's definition of a power assisted bicycle to allow heavier, pedal-assist cycles having greater power output to operate on public highways and to work with the City of Toronto and other municipalities to ensure that the definition supports more efficient and sustainable urban delivery option.

6. City Council request the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to introduce the necessary legislative and regulatory changes to make off-peak delivery a permanent program.

7. City Council request that all funding and positions required for implementation of the Freight and Goods Movement Strategy by Transportation Services be included in the 2021 Operating Budget and 2021 - 2030 Capital Budget submission for consideration.

On October 18, 2017, the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee adopted the Freight and Goods Movement Strategy Framework (Item PW24.8). The framework recognized the need for a freight and goods movement strategy (FGMS) that supports goods movement industries and applies a Complete Streets approach with regard to freight requirements to strengthen Toronto's economic competiveness while supporting neighborhoods.

The City of Toronto has been experiencing unprecedented growth, evidenced on our streets by increased demands on curb space partially attributable to the rise of

E-commerce and associated delivery systems. Given these demands and the proliferation of new technologies, delivery models and methods in goods movement, the associated impacts of some of these freight activities  also contributes to traffic congestion, poor air quality,  increased Greenhouse Gas (GHG)  emissions and noise and has sometimes compromised the safety of other modes in the city. Likewise, the freight and goods movement industry have also experienced challenges of their own such as limited parking and loading options, travel time reliability across the city, and regulatory constraints that limit new delivery methods, to name a few. The FGMS outlined in this report contains targeted actions to address many of these issues faced by both the City and the freight industry.  

In developing the FGMS, a study was undertaken which included literature reviews, industry interviews, freight modeling and analysis, strategic planning, policy development and stakeholder consultation and engagement. Consultation was a major cornerstone of this study because the impacts of freight and goods movement is not just a local matter but of regional concern to many of the surrounding municipalities and agencies. Ultimately, the findings provided the opportunity to:

- Understand the state of freight and goods movement in the City, including regional impacts and opportunities;

- Understand experiences elsewhere, including best practices;

- Understand stakeholder needs and concerns;

- Identify strategic policy options; and

- Develop a Freight and Goods Movement Strategy (FGMS).

The Vision Statement of the FGMS is to provide a goods movement system that is safe, reliable and sustainable, connecting people and products while protecting Toronto's vibrant and thriving economy and quality of life. The Strategy identifies twenty-four (24) strategic actions that Transportation Services proposes to undertake to enhance city-wide Freight and Goods Movement immediately and over the next several years. These strategic actions can be grouped into the categories of system and access performance, environment, equity, economic competitiveness, safety and adaptability.

The staff report is seeking City Council approval on twenty-four (24) strategic actions meant to address the unique characteristics, needs, and impacts of freight mobility. The FGMS provides a framework to support the current networks and operations of goods movers, shippers, carriers and manufacturers, while also keeping a long-term horizon on the future disruptive changes to come. The Strategy will be delivered over the next 1 to 3+ years and will be led by Transportation Services in partnership with other divisions or external partners.

While the FGMS was initiated and for the most part completed in pre-COVID-19 times, the current pandemic has given new urgency and profile to the importance of the optimal management of freight and goods movement in Toronto and enabled the City to accelerate some early pilot projects.

The Infrastructure and Environment Committee recommends that:

1. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, as part of the Parking Strategy, to review residential front yard and commercial boulevard parking with consideration of electric vehicle initiatives, and impacts on tree canopy, stormwater management, urban design, safety and enforcement and report back to Infrastructure and Environment Committee in the second quarter of 2021.

2. City Council request the General Manager, Transportation Services, to begin implementing, and to report to the appropriate committee in the second quarter of 2021 on, measures to encourage electric vehicle ownership for residents who do not have a garage or dedicated parking space, such as:

a. making new parking pad permits conditional on applicants contributing to electric vehicle charging infrastructure, either by installing a charger on the property, or contributing to a fund to expand on-street or shared electric vehicle infrastructure;

b. exploring partnerships with City agencies such as the Toronto Parking Authority and Toronto Transit Commission to expand electric vehicle infrastructure on publicly-owned properties; and

c. exploring opportunities with the Director, Environment and Energy, to refine and accelerate the City's existing on-street electric vehicle charging efforts through cross-sector partnerships.

3. City Council amend City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 918, Parking on Residential Front Yards and Boulevards, by deleting the phrase: “30 and 31” from § 918-5B and inserting the phrase: “and 30”.

4. City Council amend City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 918, Parking on Residential Front Yards and Boulevards, by inserting a new § 918-7.12 as follows:

§ 918-7.12  Wards 31 and 32

A. Despite any other provisions in this chapter,  § 918-8C(2) and (3) do not apply to an application for front yard parking and/or to an application for a license to park on any portion of a boulevard where the application is for a residential property located within the area of the former City of Toronto in Ward 32 or within the area of the former City of Toronto in Ward 31 where:

(1). (a) The application is for a front yard parking pad adjacent to an existing mutual driveway which has a width of less than 2.2 metres measured at the narrowest point; or

(b) Additional ramping is not required or, if any additional ramping is required, there is no loss of an on-street permit parking space; and

(2). The property meets all other requirements of this chapter.

B. Despite any other provisions in this chapter, § 918-9D and E do not apply to a front yard parking pad in the area of the former City of Toronto in the portion of Ward 32 east of Coxwell Avenue or in the area of the former City of Toronto in Ward 32 or in Ward 31 where any additional ramping is not required.

5. City Council authorize the direct and appropriate staff to take the necessary steps to give effect the Council’s decision, including the introduction in Council of any bills that may be necessary to give effect to Council’s decision.

The ability to apply for and obtain front-yard parking pads for private residential homes on the City-owned boulevard and/or front yard in certain areas of Toronto was originally intended to provide parking for residents where there is no parking available on-site in the form of a garage, driveway or other reserved outdoor space. Over time, adjustments to Chapter 918 of the Municipal Code based on specific area characteristics as well as the recent ward boundary changes of December 1, 2018 have resulted in different permissions and regulations across the City and even within the boundaries of a single ward.

Concerns about the implementation of front-yard parking from equity, environmental and urban design perspectives continue to be expressed by residents and elected officials.  Furthermore, the emergence of electric vehicle technologies have increased public demand to accommodate the charging of electric vehicles on private property and within the city road allowance.

The purpose of this report is to respond to a request from Toronto and East York Community Council to provide comment on the potential impact of allowing front yard parking pad applications in currently prohibited zones if a resident purchases and maintains ownership of an electric vehicle. City Planning, Toronto Water, Environment and Energy, Urban Forestry and Toronto Hydro were consulted during the preparation of this report.

A city-wide residential parking strategy is underway and is expected to be completed in 2021. Decisions regarding new implementation features for either Front Yard Parking or On-Street Residential Permit Parking, including provisions for electric vehicles, should be postponed until the strategy is complete and brought to City Council.

The Infrastructure and Environment Committee recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services to negotiate and enter into a non-competitive agreement with Paradigm Software, LLC for the implementation and ongoing support of a modernized Weigh Scale Solution in the amount of $3,523,040 net of Harmonized Sales Tax ($3,585,046 net of Harmonized Sales Tax recoveries), on terms and conditions satisfactory to the General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

The purpose of this report is to seek authority from City Council for the General Manager, Solid Waste Management Services to negotiate and enter into a non-competitive contract with Paradigm Software, LLC to implement and support a modernized Weigh Scale Solution for the City of Toronto.

This contract has total potential value of $3,523,040 net of Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) ($3,585,046 net of HST recoveries) which includes an initial capital cost in the amount of $2,281,699 net of HST ($2,321,857 net of HST recoveries), and eight (8) year operating cost in the amount of $1,241,341 net of HST ($1,263,189 net of HST recoveries).

This new, modernized Weigh Scale Solution is required to address increasing sustainability risks related to the current Weigh Scale Solution's compatibility with the City's current version of Windows Operating system.

In addition to mitigating the system stability and sustainment risks, Paradigm Software, LLC's modernized Weigh Scale Solution acts as a platform from which the City can greatly expand its automation capabilities, service availability, public and employee safety and greater compliance with regulatory requirements, such as the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.  The enhanced capabilities provided by the modernized Weigh Scale Solution will enable 24-hour operation at all seven (7) City transfer stations, automated weigh scale ticket processing, automated radiation detection and will reduce the need for person-to-person interaction through new self-service capabilities.

The Transfer Station Efficiencies Project Steering Committee, including stakeholders from Technology Services Division, expressed support for Paradigm Software, LLC's proposed Weigh Scale Solution as the best option for Solid Waste Management Services from a City of Toronto technology compatibility perspective, as well as a business operations compatibility perspective.

The Infrastructure and Environment Committee recommends that:

1. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services to assess the condition of, and conduct emergency road repairs and pothole patching along, York Downs Drive, east of Bathurst Street, and meet with the local Councillor to review details and scheduling of scheduled, essential resurfacing work. 

A portion of York Downs Drive, east of Bathurst Street., has been scheduled for local road resurfacing by the Capital Program group. However, the timeline for this work is being driven (and delayed) by a Toronto Water watermain replacement project scheduled to take place in 2023. As the City coordinates and bundles infrastructure projects together, Transportation Services does not favour accelerating the resurfacing of York Downs Drive before the projected watermain replacement work takes place.

York Downs Drive, east of Bathurst Street, has no sidewalks and has been badly damaged as a result of years of construction, usage and weather erosion. Residents have long been forced to walk on the road to reach retail and transit services along Bathurst Street. The current pandemic has only worsened the aforementioned situation as neighbours try to adhere to social distancing guidelines while safely navigating the many potholes along York Downs Drive. The street is in desperate need of emergency patching and repair, as we wait for substantial resurfacing work to take place in the near future.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:  

1. City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to negotiate and enter into, on behalf of the City, a municipal housing facility agreement (the City's Contribution Agreement) with the housing providers described in Table 2 in the Financial Impact section of the report (October 5, 2020) from the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to secure affordable housing in accordance with By-law 1756-2019, in return for the exemption from taxation for municipal and school purposes, on terms and conditions satisfactory to the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, in a form approved by the City Solicitor.

2. City Council authorize an exemption from taxation for municipal and school purposes for the properties and periods of time described in Table 2 in the Financial Impact section of report the (October 5, 2020) from the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, with the tax exemption being effective from the "Effective Date" of the municipal housing facility agreement (the City's Contribution Agreement).

3. City Council authorize the Controller to cancel or refund any taxes paid after the effective date of the municipal housing facility agreement (the City's Contribution Agreement).

4. City Council enact a site specific by-law amending the criteria for "Former Federal Project" in the Municipal Housing Facility By-law 1756-2019, to exempt 11 Winona Drive operated by Hellenic Homes for the Aged Inc., from the eligibility criteria that former federal projects must have their original operating agreement with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation expired to meet the definition of "Former Federal Project" in the Municipal Housing Facility By-law 1756-2019.

5. City Council direct the City Clerk to give written notice of the municipal housing facility agreement to the Minister of Finance, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation, the Toronto District School Board, the Toronto Catholic District School Board, le Conseil scolaire Viamonde, and le Conseil scolaire catholique MonAvenir.

In December 2019, City Council approved the Community Housing Partnership Renewal Program (CHPR), a new program designed to incentivize former federal non-profit housing providers with expired operating agreements to enter into new agreements with the City to secure affordable housing and maintain or improve levels of affordability. The implementation of Community Housing Partnership Renewal Program requires site-specific authority from Council to approve individual municipal housing facility agreements for participating housing providers.

The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authority for Shelter, Support and Housing Administration (SSHA) to implement the first round of non-profit housing providers that have committed to participating in Community Housing Partnership Renewal Program . This includes enrolling four housing providers with a total of 360 affordable rental units for 20-year terms. In addition to securing affordability, agreements under Community Housing Partnership Renewal Program will include requirements that promote long-term sustainability of the rental stock and deepen affordability of a mix of unit sizes through the provision of housing benefits.

The HousingTO 2020-2030 Action Plan listed Community Housing Partnership Renewal Program as a key initiative supporting the City's objective to protect non-profit housing and the City's commitment to achieving related targets in the action plan over the next ten years. Granting property tax relief to non-profit housing providers participating in Community Housing Partnership Renewal Program is a cost-effective approach to secure affordable rental units and maintain the supply of affordable rental housing in Toronto.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:  

1. City Council consent to the termination of the social housing agreement dated January 28, 1991 between the City and Mainstay Housing and discharge of the registration of the social housing agreement against title to 223 Osler Street; and

2. City Council authorize the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to execute and deliver such agreements, notices and consents required to accomplish the foregoing recommendation on terms and conditions satisfactory to the General Manager and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

The City of Toronto and Mainstay Housing ("Mainstay"), a non-profit housing organization, entered into a social housing agreement in 1991 as a condition of a Committee of Adjustment decision for a variance requested for the construction of a three-storey, 13-unit building at 223 Osler Street. The agreement is governed under section 453.1 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, which requires that any disposal of property requires the consent of Toronto City Council.

Mainstay wishes to sell the property, due to the extraordinary cost of remediating structural deterioration in the building, and apply the proceeds of the sale to Mainstay's Development Fund. This Fund is used to support the acquisition and development of new properties for mixed income rental housing, including affordable units for individuals experiencing homelessness.

On November 5, 2019, the Ministry of Health, Mainstay's primary funder, consented to the sale. The social housing agreement with the City is registered on title and prevents Mainstay from proceeding with plans to sell the property and invest the proceeds in future acquisition and development of new rental housing. As such, on May 28, 2020, Mainstay requested the termination and discharge of the social housing agreement for 223 Osler Street.

This report recommends City Council consent to the termination of the social housing agreement with Mainstay Housing and the discharge of its registration against title to 223 Osler Street.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration when identifying sites for possible conversion from shelter to permanent housing, or sites that could accommodate both uses to provide a broad continuum of housing, to add criteria to the list identified in Creating New Affordable Housing and Responding to Funding Programs as outlined in PH16.8a, that would consider underrepresented locations where such conversions will allow residents living with homelessness to stay within their community and local support network.

On September 30, 2020, City Council adopted Item No. "PH16.8 - Addressing Housing and Homelessness Issues in Toronto through Inter-governmental Partnerships" and directed the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration to report to the October 20, 2020 meeting of the Planning and Housing Committee on a plan to shift future capital and operating funding from shelters to create permanent supportive housing and to include the plan as part of the 2021 Capital and Operating Budget submission.

 
At that meeting City Council also directed staff to develop an affordable housing acquisitions strategy to support the City's COVID-19 Housing and Homelessness Recovery Response Plan, and to report back to the October 20, 2020 meeting of the Planning and Housing Committee with recommendations to activate the strategy to take advantage of the federal Rapid Housing Initiative and ensure that the City is well-positioned to move quickly to acquire properties for people experiencing homelessness.

This report responds to Council's direction and provides details on actions taken to-date by staff to proactively prepare to take advantage of the federal Rapid Housing Initiative. It also provides details on how the City plans to pivot to permanent housing solutions while also maintaining capacity in the shelter system for its intended short-term emergency use.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:  

1. City Council direct the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, in consultation with the University Health Network ("UHN"), to complete the appropriate due diligence on the house-form properties identified as 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue, and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue (the "House-form Properties") and report to the Planning and Housing Committee in the first quarter of 2021 with recommendations including proposed terms and conditions for the City of Toronto to enter into  a long-term lease with University Health Network at below market rent in respect of the House-form Properties, and budget details in relation to the lease and operation of the properties.

2. City Council direct the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with CreateTO, University Health Network, the ward Councillor, the tenants of the house-form buildings and the local community, to begin a visioning and master planning exercise for a future redevelopment of the lands, including the potential to add modular housing on the vacant parcels as well as the large parking lot at 150 Dunn Avenue, as part of a shorter term plan, and report back to Council in the second quarter of 2021 with recommendations to activate the site and create new affordable and supportive housing opportunities.

3. City Council direct the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, in consultation with CreateTO and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to evaluate additional privately owned lands adjacent to or in proximity to the lands owned by University Health Network within the block for opportunities to create a more efficient redevelopment block, and report back to Council on potential to incorporate these additional properties as part of a larger assembly and redevelopment plan.

4. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to allocate up to $100,000 in funding, inclusive of HST and disbursements, from the Capital Revolving Reserve Fund (XR1058) for the purpose of completing the pre-development work, including the due diligence work and the visioning and master planning exercise referred to in Recommendations 1 and 2 above.

5. City Council approve an increase to the 2020 Approved Operating Budget for Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, in coordination with the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, of up to $100,000 gross, $0 net funded from the Capital Revolving Reserve Fund for Affordable Housing (XR1058) to support pre-development activities related to the University Health Network-owned institutional and House-form Properties in Parkdale for the purposes of creating new affordable rental and supportive housing opportunities.

6. Council approve an exemption from the Donations to the City of Toronto For Community Benefits Policy to help advance a potential below fair market value lease to the City from University Health Network of lands located at 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue, and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue for the purpose of affordable housing and report back as necessary to seek further direction in this regard.

7. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to execute an Option to Lease agreement with the University Health Network that would provide the City with the exclusive option to lease 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue, and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue for nominal consideration, in a form satisfactory to the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in consultation with the City Solicitor. 

The Executive Director, Housing Secretariat gave a presentation on Creating New Supportive Housing Opportunities in Parkdale in Partnership with the University Health Network and United Way of Greater Toronto.

Access to safe, secure, and affordable housing is essential to the health and socio-economic well-being of individuals, families and communities. The current COVID-19 health emergency has re-enforced this fact as residents without adequate and stable housing, including those who are homeless or in low-income communities, have been hardest hit by the pandemic.

In large urban centres like Toronto where housing costs continue to grow faster than incomes, an increasing number of households are being pushed deeper into poverty and homelessness. Poverty not only prevents people from being able to maintain stable housing, it also leads to poor health outcomes, and places increased pressures on public health systems.

Recognizing the complex link between poverty, health and social outcomes, and the need to take a systemic approach to improving the lives of residents across the city, the University Health Network (UHN), the United Way of Greater Toronto (UWGT) and the City of Toronto entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish the Social Medicine Initiative in 2019. Through the pandemic, this MOU was central in establishing a number of COVID-19 hotel recovery sites with UHN and the City of Toronto for people experiencing homelessness alongside community partners including the Neighbourhood Group and Parkdale Queen West Community Health Centre. The partnership resulted in caring for over 1,300 patients and families, and it continues to inform a Social Medicine approach in improving the quality of care for marginalized patient populations.

The Social Medicine Initiative (SMI) is a collaborative approach integrating health and social services to improve health outcomes for Toronto residents. The intent of SMI is to scale such integration and any upstream policy solutions such as housing for all or income supports to improve the wellbeing of our city’s most disadvantaged patient populations. In order to prevent worsening health conditions, SMI is focused on a more proactive approach that improves access to services such as primary care, mental health, and harm reduction, while meaningfully addressing the social determinants such as poverty, food insecurity, social isolation and housing to improve population health.

This report outlines a framework to activate a SMI housing partnership and create new permanent supportive housing in the Parkdale neighbourhood for structurally vulnerable and marginalized individuals, including people experiencing homelessness. It proposes a unique model to utilize land owned by UHN, and new affordable and supportive housing which coordinates resources to help establish a campus of care onsite.

This innovative approach will see affordable housing integrated with health and social services. It will provide more housing opportunities for people who are currently being under-served by the health care system while experiencing homelessness and other challenges imposed by poverty. Furthermore, this approach will integrate medical care and community supports to provide solutions for permanent housing and the wraparound services residents need as evidenced through the partnership in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The lands owned by UHN in Parkdale include the majority of the block bounded by King Street West, Close Avenue, Dunn Avenue and Springhurst Avenue. The properties include both institutional and house-form buildings and comprise of the EW Bickle Centre for Complex Continuing Care, the Sunflower House Child Care Centre fronting onto Dunn Avenue, and the existing Lakeside Long-term Care Centre. The properties also include three parcels that are currently vacant as well as a large parking lot.

UHN has recently submitted a planning application to expand the Lakeside Long-Term Care Centre to include a new 6-storey addition with 192 beds which is scheduled for consideration by Toronto and East York Community Council and City Council in October, 2020 (Item No. TE19.1). The new long-term care beds will provide homes for elderly residents who are unable to live independently, and contribute to the continuum of housing and health model envisioned for the site.

The application related to the Lakeside Long-term Care Centre was voluntarily revised by UHN to include the 17 institutional and house-form building properties within the block. City Planning is recommending approval of the re-zoning application that would allow for the expansion of the long-term care centre on condition that the rental tenure of all existing rental dwelling units be protected for a period of 49 years.

Further signifying UHN's commitment to incorporate affordable and supportive housing as part of its health care model, UHN is in discussions with the City regarding a potential long-term lease to the City for the existing house-form buildings. As some of these properties are occupied, they will continue to be operated to provide affordable housing for existing residents until future redevelopment of the site. The City will select a non-profit organization to manage these homes.

Subject to Council's approval of this report, staff will proceed with due diligence work related to the house-form properties and will report back to Council by the second quarter of 2021 with recommendations related to the proposed lease arrangement. Concurrently, staff will begin work with the UHN, UWGT, the local community (including existing UHN tenants) and the ward Councillor to plan for the future redevelopment within the block. A report will be presented to Council for consideration in the second quarter of 2021 with a plan to initiate the project, including the potential to add net new affordable rental housing on the vacant lots and large parking lot.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to adopt the process developed as part of the Rooming House Acquisition Pilot Project, outlined in Attachment 1 to the report (October 5, 2020) from the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, to support future non-profit led affordable rental and co-operative housing acquisitions based on the availability of City and/or City-administered funding and incentives.

2. City Council direct the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to report in the first quarter of 2021 to the Planning and Housing Committee on the potential of establishing an ongoing Municipal Small Sites Rental Housing Acquisition Program that provides dedicated funding and financing to non-profit housing organizations or community land trusts to facilitate the purchase and conversion of at-risk private market affordable rental housing into permanently affordable housing.

On July 23, 2018, City Council adopted Item EX36.38, "Potential Rooming House Property Acquisition and Modernization in Ward 14 Parkdale-High Park", and directed staff to undertake a pilot project to select and assist a non-profit organization in acquiring and modernizing a rooming house property available for sale in Ward 4 (formerly Ward 14) Parkdale-High Park. Staff were also directed to report back on the results of the pilot. This report responds to Council's request. Additionally, it provides information on two subsequent non-profit affordable housing acquisitions which were supported through City and federal-provincial funding programs.

Rooming houses, also referred to as multi-tenant houses, provide a critical supply of deeply affordable housing options for many of Toronto's most vulnerable and marginalized residents. However, in the city's current real estate market, this important form of housing continues to be at risk of being lost due to redevelopment and conversion to other uses. In particular, Ward 4-Parkdale-High Park, which has historically had a significant number of rooming houses, has seen a number of these properties lost in recent years due to sales, conversions and redevelopment. This has led to displacement and housing instability for many households.

The City of Toronto has taken a number of actions to protect rooming houses and tenants, in partnership with non-profit housing providers and other orders of government. These actions have included a rooming house acquisition pilot project for Ward 4 - Parkdale-High Park supported by the local Councillor through $1.5 million in Section 37 community benefit funds. An additional $600,000 in federal-provincial funding was also allocated to modernize the property following acquisition.

The pilot project involved a City-initiated Request for Proposals (RFP) process to select a non-profit organization; a pre-approval of City funding that allowed the selected non-profit to move quickly and put offers on suitable properties as they became available on the market; and a process to expedite the allocation of the City funding to complete the transaction while also ensuring appropriate due diligence and oversight. The pilot project resulted in the Parkdale Neighbourhood Land Trust, which was the selected non-profit housing provider, being able to successfully acquire and renovate a 15-unit licenced rooming house which will provide affordable rental homes for tenants for a minimum period of 99 years.

In addition to the pilot project mentioned above, in 2019 the Housing Secretariat administered a competitive process to allocate federal-provincial program funds to non-profit housing providers which resulted in another rooming house being acquired. Additionally, a related acquisition of an affordable rental apartment building was supported by the Housing Secretariat. In total, these three recent acquisitions, all in Ward 4-Parkdale-High Park, have resulted in 63 dwellings units being secured as permanently affordable rental homes for low-and-moderate income residents.

The non-profit acquisition pilot project undertaken by staff in 2019 has provided valuable insights into how the City can support the non-profit sector to successfully acquire and protect deeply affordable rental housing in perpetuity. Together with other recent non-profit acquisition projects supported by the City, a process has been established which can now be replicated and expanded across the city to ensure that rooming houses and other forms of affordable housing are preserved and maintained to provide safe, secure and adequate homes for residents. In order to increase the number of non-profit property acquisitions however, it is critical that ongoing funding be available, including federal and provincial funding, to complement City investments.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council, in its capacity:

a.  as Shareholder of Toronto Community Housing Corporation ("TCHC"), pursuant to Section 7.4.1 (c) of the City's Shareholder Direction to Toronto Community Housing Corporation, approve Toronto Community Housing Corporation proceeding with the Initial Development Proposal outlined in this report as the project concept for the revitalization of Toronto Community Housing Corporation's properties located in Lawrence Heights Phases 2 and 3 and outlined in Attachment 2 to the report (October 5, 2020) from the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat; and

 
b.  as Service Manager under section 161(2) of the Housing Services Act, 2011 ("HSA") consent to Toronto Community Housing Corporation proceeding with the Initial Development Proposal outlined in this report as the project concept for the revitalization of Lawrence Heights Phases 2 and 3.
 

2. City Council direct that the confidential information contained in Confidential Attachment 1 to the report (October 5, 2020) from the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat remain confidential in its entirety until such time as Toronto Community Housing Corporation agrees that the confidential information may be disclosed to the public.

3. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to work with Toronto Community Housing Corporation and explore all opportunities available to increase the number of affordable rental units on the site.

4. City Council authorize City staff, in consultation with Toronto Community Housing Corporation, to submit an application for funding and financing consideration for affordable housing under the National Housing Strategy Co-Investment Fund and report to City Council on the progress in 2021 as part of the final report for consent to proceed with the revitalization project.

5. City Council direct the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in collaboration with the appropriate City divisions, CreateTO and Toronto Community Housing Corporation, to report to Council by the third quarter of 2021 with details of the Toronto Community Housing Corporation-recommended development proposal, refined cost estimates, and to seek final approval for the project, including approval of the required planning applications.

6. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in consultation with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation and the local Councillor, to explore opportunities to increase the heights and density for the proposed residential buildings in all future phases of the Lawrence Heights revitalization project, including amendments which may be required to the existing Secondary Plan.

 
7. City Council direct the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation, to explore opportunities to increase the number of affordable rental units in all future phases of the Lawrence Heights revitalization, including using any additional density resulting from the actions in Recommendation 6 above, to help offset the cost of delivering the affordable housing.

 
8. City Council request the appropriate City divisions in consultation with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation to prioritize the building of the new community hub in Phase 2 of the Lawrence Heights revitalization project.

 
9. City Council request the appropriate City divisions in consultation with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation to explore including a stand-alone seniors buildings and a street-level convenience store in Phase 2 or 3 of the Lawrence Heights revitalization.

 
10. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to work with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation to explore adding in the new buildings in Phases 2 and 3 of the Lawrence Heights revitalization, where possible, indoor and outdoor hand washing stations; enhanced natural and mechanical ventilation; and all other design and architectural features needed to address the current COVID-19 pandemic and any similar future health emergencies.

 
11. City Council request the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat to work with the Toronto Community Housing Corporation and explore, through the developer RFP to be issued for Phases 2 and 3, the establishment of a "Rent to Own" program or affordable homeownership opportunities for long-standing Toronto Community Housing Corporation tenants.

On July 16, 2019, through Item No. PH7.4, "A New Approvals Framework for Toronto Community Housing Corporation Revitalization Projects", City Council adopted a new approvals framework for Toronto Community Housing ("TCHC") revitalization projects. As part of this new approvals framework, a stage gate process was established to provide the City with early and enhanced oversight of TCHC projects, and to ensure that these revitalizations support strategic city-building priorities.

In line with the new approvals framework, this report provides an outline of the project concept for Phases Two and Three of the Lawrence Heights revitalization (the "Initial Development Proposal"). It also summarizes issues and opportunities for achieving city-building goals, provides a record of engagement to-date, and outlines recommended next steps.

The Initial Development Proposal reflects the Lawrence Allen Secondary Plan, approved by City Council in November 2011 through Item No. NY11.24a. It includes the replacement of 636 social housing units plus the addition of an estimated 2,488 market rental and ownership homes and 130 affordable rental units. Other city-building objectives proposed to be achieved include: a new community hub with a public park, public school, daycare, community centre, and a new network of public streets and infrastructure. Phases Two and Three are intended to be approved together, but will be constructed through a series of sub-phases, with the exact timing and configuration to be confirmed once a developer partner has been procured.

The project concept outlined in this report may change as pre-development work advances. There may be shifts in project design as a result of further review and evaluation through the planning application process, and also potentially as a result of changes in the market, construction costs or other factors. Furthermore, through the development review and community consultation processes, an appropriate zoning by-law amendment, plan of sub-division, site plan and built form will be identified, which will ultimately determine the final number of rental and ownership homes and amenities at the site.

Approval of the recommendations in this report will allow TCHC to proceed with a public Request for Proposal ("RFP") process to identify a development partner for the site. Following this process, and in line with the approvals framework, City staff, in consultation with TCHC, will report back to Council in 2021 with details of the TCHC-recommended development proposal, refined cost estimates, and to seek final approval for the project, including approval of the required planning applications.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to modify the Terms of Reference for the Planning Rationale Report required in support of planning applications to include a requirement that applications that propose residential uses identify in their Planning Rationale Report how the application proposes to address and provide for affordable and supportive housing in consideration of the Official Plan policies that seek to achieve a full range of housing including affordable and supportive housing; and

2. City Council request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to include in the Final Recommendation report how the proposal will contribute to the achievement of the Official Plan's policies with respect to the provision of a full range of housing including affordable and supportive housing.

The following gave a presentation on Development Pipeline:

- The Manager, Strategic Initiatives Policy and Analysis, City Planning

- The Planner, Strategic Initiatives Policy and Analysis, City Planning

- The Assistant Planner, Strategic Initiatives Policy and Analysis, City Planning

The City Planning monitors development activity in the city. This report and the attached bulletin summarize development activity in the city over the past five years. Information from the Division's Land Use Information System II and other sources have been analyzed to provide an overview of all development projects with any development activity between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. Development activity refers to progress at any stage of the approvals and development processes, including application submission, development review, development approval, building permit application, building permit issuance, construction, occupancy and completion. The bulletin illustrates how the city has grown over these five years and how it may continue to develop over time.

In total, 435,069 residential units and 12,085,148 million square meters of non-residential gross floor area (GFA) were proposed by projects with development activity between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019. Of this, 148,797 residential units were approved but not yet built, and an additional 193,631 units were in projects still under review. There are 342,428 residential units and 9,791,833 m2 of non-residential gross floor area that are either under review or active, indicating a continuation of strong development activity in Toronto in the coming years. If all of these units were realized over time, they would increase the total number of dwellings in the city by a third.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council adopt the Retail Design Manual, included as Attachment 1 to the report (October 5, 2020) from Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

2. City Council request that the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, apply the Retail Design Manual in the evaluation of new and under review development proposals containing retail uses.

3. City Council request that the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning in advancing planning studies examine how the best practices in the Retail Design Manual can be inputs into area-specific planning frameworks, including Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, to support resilient, flexible and adaptable retail space as part of complete communities.

This report recommends Council's adoption of the Retail Design Manual shown as Attachment 1 to this report and that Council direct staff to apply the manual for use in the evaluation of retail development.

The Retail Design Manual supports the objectives of complete communities and vibrant streets which are closely tied to the provision of successful, resilient and dynamic retail uses. This Manual is a collection of best practices and is intended to provide guidance on developing successful ground floor retail spaces. The Manual provides aspirational retail design best practices to inform, guide, inspire and educate those involved in the design and development of retail uses including developers, architects/designers, City staff, Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) and property managers. Each of these user groups will refer to this document in a different way and at different stages in the planning, design and development process.

Planning and designing high quality and diverse retail spaces helps to achieve good city building and economic objectives, and contributes to an animated and inviting public realm.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council amend the New Business provisions of the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 27, Council Procedures, to authorize the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to report directly to Council, in order to make recommendations on decisions under the Ontario Heritage Act, when a matter is deemed urgent.

2. City Council amend the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 103, Heritage, directing that all reports recommending designation of a property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act report to Planning and Housing Committee, after consultation with the Toronto Preservation Board, except in cases where the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning reports directly to City Council as contemplated in Recommendation 1 above.

3. City Council amend the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 103, Heritage, Article 8, Delegation of Authority, to delegate authority to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning or designate(s) to negotiate and sign heritage easement agreements, to agree to extensions of statutory timelines where permitted under the Ontario Heritage Act and other administrative decision making powers.

4. City Council amend the City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 103, Heritage, Articles 3 and 4 to update the complete application types and requirements as generally described in Attachment 1 to the report (October 5, 2020) from the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

5. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the necessary Bills to give effect to City Council's Decision and to make any necessary clarifications, specifications, refinements, modifications, technical amendments, or By-law amendments as may be identified by the City Solicitor, in consultation with the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in order to give effect to the implementation of changes to the Ontario Heritage Act, including coordinating the enactment date of the municipal code changes with proclamation of the relevant provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act.

6. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to review options on introducing a fee associated with the review of the required applications under the Ontario Heritage Act.

On May 2, 2019, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing introduced Bill 108, the Province’s Housing Supply Action Plan (More Homes, More Choice Act). Through Bill 108 the Province passed, but has not yet enacted, significant amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act ("OHA"). Many of the OHA amendments will require Council to make decisions, specifically in relation to designations, alterations and demolitions, within very tight timelines (90 days). As such, it will be imperative that Council be able to make decisions as quickly as possible. Failure to make a decision within the prescribed time limits will, as a result of the amendments, result in deemed consent. On September 21, 2020, the Province has released a draft regulation associated with the amendments for consultation and comment.

This report recommends amendments to Chapter 27 of the Municipal Code, Council Procedures, to allow the Chief Planner, when required, to report on specified heritage matters directly to Council in order to meet timelines prescribed by the Ontario Heritage Act.

This report also recommends amendments to Chapter 103 of the Municipal Code, Heritage, in order to delegate authority to the Chief Planner to agree to the extension of timeframes at an owner's request to extend of deadlines prescribed by the Ontario Heritage Act and expand on and update the heritage complete application requirements.

The Planning and Housing Committee recommends that:

1. City Council enact zoning by-law amendments substantially in accordance with Attachments 1 and 2 to the report (October 5, 2020) from the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

2. City Council enact zoning by-law amendments substantially in accordance with Attachments 3, 4, and 5 to the report (October 5, 2020) from the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to each zoning by-law amendment as may be required.

4. City Council request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the Chief Building Official, in consultation with any relevant divisions, to explore options to expedite the review of any additional Building Code, Fire Code, and zoning regulations associated with the implementation of covered and partially enclosed patios for the 2021-2022 winter season.

This report recommends temporary use by-laws pursuant to Section 39 of the Planning Act to ease zoning restrictions on outdoor patios associated with eating establishments, take-out eating establishments, and recreation uses. The proposed by-laws will replace the Ministerial Zoning Order issued by the Province as O. Reg. 358/20, which will expire on November 16, 2020. The temporary use by-laws will continue to ease restrictions on outdoor patios associated with restaurants and bars during the winter months, in the event that individual businesses choose to operate patios for their patrons during this time.

One temporary use by-law is proposed as an amendment to the city-wide harmonized Zoning By-law (569-2013). The second temporary use by-law will address properties that remain subject to the former municipal zoning by-laws.

The by-laws would allow a modest increase to the maximum size of outdoor patios and would remove restrictions that might prevent an outdoor patio located in front of buildings. The by-laws have particular consideration for non-residential properties with dedicated surface parking in front of the building, by permitting patios notwithstanding parking requirements. The temporary use by-laws are proposed to expire on May 25, 2021, after the conclusion of next year's Victoria Day long weekend.

This report also recommends time extensions to three site-specific temporary use by-laws previously adopted by Council that grant zoning permissions to three temporary outdoor patios currently operating under circumstances or site conditions as part.

The Planning and Housing Committee submits the item to City Council without recommendations.

The Planning and Housing Committee:

1.  Requested the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat report directly to the October 27 and 28, 2020 meeting of City Council and provide an update on the affordable rental housing project at 1117-1119 Gerrard Street East, including details of the additional funding needed for the project and a recommended source of funds.

In March 2017, City Council requested the Director, Affordable Housing Office to negotiate the terms and conditions of federal/provincial financial assistance and City incentives to WoodGreen Community Housing Inc. ("WoodGreen") for the redevelopment of 1117 and 1119 Gerrard Street East. Through this process, a total of $5.4 million in federal/provincial funding was approved to support the addition of 36 new affordable rental homes for seniors, with rents not to exceed 80% Average Market Rent (AMR). In March 2018, City Council also authorized property tax exemptions for the new affordable rental homes.

It has come to my attention that due to increases in construction costs and other factors beyond WoodGreen's control, additional funding may be needed to support completion of this project in 2020. The completion of this project is critical especially at this time due to the need to provide safe, secure and affordable homes for low-and-moderate-income seniors. As the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, seniors have been disproportionately impacted by the health crisis and more housing options to help seniors age in place is urgently needed.

Etobicoke York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the installation of traffic control signals at the intersection of Islington Avenue and Aviemore Drive.

As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates bus service on Islington Avenue, City Council approval of this report is required. The TTC has been consulted on this matter.

Transportation Services is recommending installation of a traffic control signal on Islington Avenue and Aviemore Drive. This installation is recommended based on the long spacing to adjacent pedestrian crossing protection. A pedestrian signal will enhance safety for pedestrians but may increase delays for north-south motorists.

Etobicoke York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 450 Rustic Road.

The purpose of this staff report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 450 Rustic Road.

Etobicoke York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council rescind the community safety zone designation in effect at all times on Mount Olive Drive, between Canve Crescent and Kipling Avenue.

2. City Council designate a community safety zone to be in effect at all times on Mount Olive Drive, between Vange Crescent and Kipling Avenue.

Mount Olive Drive, between Kipling Avenue and Gihon Spring Drive, is classified as a collector road and has a regulatory speed limit of 40 km/h. This roadway is on the frontage of residential properties and a number of primary and secondary schools.

Mount Olive Drive was designated as a Community Safety Zone as part of the " Vision Zero Road Safety Plan: Designation of Community Safety Zones around Elementary Schools" (Item PW30.5 adopted as amended by City Council on June 26, 27, 28 and 29, 2018).

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2018.PW30.5

The location of the community safety zone designation on one section of Mount Olive Drive was misidentified in the original report/item as being between Canve Crescent and Kipling Avenue, when it should be between Vange Crescent and Kipling Avenue. In order for this community safety zone to be signed and enforced, a correction is required.

Etobicoke York Community Council recommends that:

1.  City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City Staff to attend at the Toronto Local Appeal Body hearing to support the Committee of Adjustment's decision to refuse the Consent and Minor Variances applications requested in Application Nos. B0073/19EYK, A0647/19EYK, and A0648/19EYK, respecting 75 Thirty Eighth Street.

 
2.  City Council authorize the City Solicitor to negotiate a settlement of the appeal of the decisions in Application Nos. B0073/19EYK, A0647/19EYK, and A0648/19EYK respecting 75 Thirty Eighth Street and authorize the City Solicitor to settle the matter on behalf of the City at her discretion after consultation with the Ward Councillor, and with the Director of Community Planning, Etobicoke York District.

On August 27, 2020, the Committee of Adjustment (the "Committee") refused a Consent to Sever and two Minor Variance applications brought by the owner of 75 Thirty Eighth Street for the following variances: lot frontage, lot area, floor space index, and side yard setback on each lot (the "Applications"). A copy of the Committee's decisions are attached. The Applications proposed to construct two new detached dwellings on undersized lots with an attached garage on each lot.

On September 16, 2020, the owner appealed the Committee's decision to refuse the Applications to the Toronto Local Appeal Body (the "TLAB").

In a report from the Supervisor, Tree Protection and Plan Review, dated May 27, 2020, Urban Forestry Staff opposed the Applications and recommended its refusal. A copy of the Urban Forestry report is attached. Urban Forestry Staff opined that the approval of the requested Consent to Sever application may result in construction that requires the permanent loss of viable planting space and the cancellation of a planned City tree. Urban Forestry staff also stated that the Official Plan contains policies specifically to the protection, preservation and enhancement of trees.

North York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council amend former City of North York Zoning By-law 7625, as amended, for the lands at 755 Steeles Avenue West substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment No. 6 to this report (September 21, 2020) from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District.

2. City Council amend City of Toronto Zoning By-law 569-2013, as amended, for the lands at 755 Steeles Avenue West substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment No. 7 to this report (September 21, 2020) from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District.

3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Zoning By-law Amendments as may be required.

4. Before introducing the necessary Bills to City Council for enactment, require the Owner to enter into an Agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to secure the following matters, services and facilities as follows:

a. prior to the issuance of any above-grade building permit, the Owner shall make a financial contribution to the City in the amount of $2,276,000.00 to be allocated toward park improvements in the vicinity of the site, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Ward Councillor;

b. the financial contributions referred to in Recommendation 4.a. above shall be indexed upwardly in accordance with the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Construction Price Index for the Toronto Census Metropolitan area, reported quarterly by Statistics Canada in Building Construction Price Indexes Table: 18- 10-0135-01, or its successor, calculated from the date of the Section 37 Agreement to the date the payment is made;

c. in the event the financial contribution referred to in Recommendation 4.a. above has not been used for the intended purpose prior to the expiry of the third anniversary of the By-law coming into full force and effect, the cash contribution may be redirected for another purpose at the sole discretion of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning in consultation with the Ward Councillor, provided that the purpose is identified in the Toronto Official Plan and will benefit the community in the vicinity of the lands; and

d. prior to the issuance of the first above-grade building permit, City Council direct that the Owner shall be required to convey the 606 square metre portion of the development site for public parkland purposes to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation. The parkland conveyance is to be free and clear, above and below grade of all physical obstructions and easements, encumbrances and encroachments, including surface and subsurface easements, unless otherwise approved by the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation.

5. City Council direct that the following matters are also recommended to be secured in the Section 37 Agreement as a legal convenience to support the development:

a. prior to the final condominium approval(s), the Owner construct a 1.5-metre wide pedestrian walkway, generally along the westerly property line, from Steeles Avenue West to connect to the new privately-owned publicly accessible open space (POPS) and new City park, to be conveyed to the City;

b. prior to the final condominium approval(s), the Owner provide the City with public access easements to enable pedestrian connections to the pedestrian walkway from Steeles Avenue West, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

c. prior to final Site Plan Approval for the development, the owner shall provide a Construction Phasing Plan for the development, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division, in consultation with the Ward Councillor, and thereafter construct the development in accordance with that Plan;

d. the owner shall continue to provide and maintain the 194 existing rental dwelling units on the lands at 755 Steeles Avenue as rental housing, together with the new and retained associated facilities and amenities of the existing residential rental property, for a period of at least 20 years commencing from the date that the Zoning By-laws come into force and effect, and with no applications for demolition or conversion from residential rental use during such 20 year period, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor;

e. the owner shall provide tenants of the existing rental dwelling units with access to all indoor and outdoor amenities within the existing building and the proposed commercial building, at no extra charge and with no pass-through costs to the tenants, including by way of an application to the Ontario Landlord Tenant Board or to any successor tribunal with jurisdiction to hear applications made under the legislation governing residential tenancies in Ontario for the purpose of obtaining an increase in residential rent above the applicable guideline. Access to, and use of, these amenities shall be on the same terms and conditions as any other resident on the subject site;

f. the owner shall undertake improvements to the existing rental apartment building at their sole expense, taking into account tenant responses to the required Tenant Survey related to programming of amenity space, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division or their designate, including, but not limited to, the following:

Prior to the first above-grade building permit for any part of the development:

i. one (1) universal washroom and one (1) washroom located on the basement floor of the existing residential rental building;

ii. upgrades to the laundry room on the basement level of the existing residential rental building to be determined through the site plan application review process and confirmed and secured in a Site Plan Agreement;

iii. thirty-four (34) bicycle parking spaces, all of which are at grade;

iv. short-term bicycle parking near the front and rear entrance of the existing residential rental building;

v. improvements to the open area adjacent to the front lobby of the existing residential rental building in the form of unmovable, durable furniture, with programming to be determined through the site plan application review process and secured in a Site Plan Agreement;

vi. new indoor amenity space of 180 square metres within the existing residential rental building which shall include but not be limited to: yoga studio and/or gymnasium; a games room which shall include, tables, seating and other entertainment equipment and other programming to be determined through the site plan application review process and secured in a Site Plan Agreement;

vii. new storage lockers accessible to tenants of the existing residential rental building and located at the Basement Level of the building. The number of new storage lockers to be determined through the site plan application review process and secured in a Site Plan Agreement;

Prior to first occupancy of any new residential units in the development:

viii. new outdoor amenity space located adjacent to the new commercial building for the exclusive use of residents of the existing residential rental building, having a minimum size of 140 square metres with programming to be determined through the site plan application review process and secured in a Site Plan Agreement;

ix. new indoor amenity space located within the new commercial building, for the exclusive use of the existing rental apartment building, having a minimum size of 109 square metres, with programming to be determined through the site plan application review process and secured in a Site Plan Agreement;

x. the residents of the existing rental apartment building and new residential building(s) will store garbage in a new Type G loading area, located in the new 10-storey residential building, with design to be determined through the site plan application review process and secured in a Site Plan Agreement, and shall be available for the purpose of waste collection for the residents of the existing rental apartment building and the new residential buildings;

xi. the costs of all improvements to the existing residential rental building and associated spaces, both within and outside the building, shall not be passed on to tenants of the existing building in any form, including by way of an application to the Ontario Landlord Tenant Board or to any successor tribunal with jurisdiction to hear applications made under the legislation governing residential tenancies in Ontario, for the purpose of obtaining an increase in residential rent above the applicable guideline; and

xii. prior to final Site Plan Approval for the development the owner agrees to develop a Construction Mitigation and Tenant Communication Plan to mitigate the impacts of construction on existing tenants, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division;

g. construct and maintain the development in accordance with Tier 1 performance measures of the Toronto Green Standard Version 3; 

h. provide in the first phase of development of the site a privately-owned publicly accessible open space (POPS) adjacent to the on-site parkland dedication with a minimum area of 1,100 square metres generally located along the eastern boundary of the parkland dedication and along Greenwin Village Road, with the details of the location and configuration of the POPS to be finalized pursuant to the site plan approval process, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division and construct the POPS in the first phase of development of the site in accordance with the approved site plan;

i. upon the earlier of (a) the first condominium registration of any part of a proposed building on the site and (b) the residential occupancy of a proposed building on the site, grant an easement to the City along with all necessary rights of support, for nominal consideration and free and clear of title encumbrances, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, over and upon the POPS in favour of the general public for the purpose of publicly accessible open space, on terms satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive  Director, City Planning Division or his designate, in consultation with the City Solicitor; and

j. Prior to the first above grade building permit being issued for this development, the sanitary sewer upgrades for the development shall be designed, constructed and operational, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director of Engineering and Construction Services.

6. City Council approve a development charge credit against the Parks and Recreation component of the Development Charges for the design and construction by the Owner of the Above Base Park Improvements to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation; the development charge credit shall be in an amount that is the lesser of the cost to the Owner of designing and constructing the Above Base Park Improvements, as approved by the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation, and the Parks and Recreation component of development charges payable for the development in accordance with the City's Development Charges By-law, as may be amended from time to time.

North York Community Council held a statutory public meeting on October 7, 2020 and notice was given in accordance with the Planning Act.

This application proposes a 10-storey, 124-unit, residential building, twenty-eight 4-storey stacked, back-to-back townhouses and a 1-storey commercial (retail) building on the site of an existing 15-storey apartment building, at 755 Steeles Avenue West.  The application also proposes 606 square metres of new City parkland, 1,100 square metres of Privately-Owned Publicly Accessible Space (POPS) and improvements to the existing rental apartment building. Vehicular access will continue to be provided by two existing driveways from Steeles Avenue West and Village Gate.

The proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conforms with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020).

This report reviews and recommends approval of the application to amend the Zoning By-laws. The redevelopment proposal intensifies a tower in the park site with a diversity of commercial and residential uses on site, while providing new public park land and open space, respects the abutting lower density residential uses and improves the streetscapes.

North York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council amend former City of North York Zoning By-law No. 7625 substantially in accordance with the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment (Attachment No. 5), attached to this report (September 15, 2020) from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District.

2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment as may be required.

This application proposes to lift the Holding (H) symbol for the lands municipally known as 57, 59 and 60 Mobile Drive and 30 Old Eglinton Avenue. This amendment would allow for the development of a 3-storey office building.

The Zoning By-law contains a Holding (H) symbol which limits office uses on the lands to the lesser of a floor space index of 0.5 times the lot area or a total gross floor area of 5,000 square metres. This report reviews and recommends approval of the application to lift the Holding (H) Symbol for the lands at 57, 59, and 60 Mobile Drive and 30 Old Eglinton Avenue.

The proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conforms with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020). The proposal provides for additional employment while promoting the efficient use of land and infrastructure without adversely impacting the surrounding transportation network.

North York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council refuse the application for Zoning By-law Amendment for the lands at 36-44 Eglinton Avenue West for the reasons outlined in the report dated September 18, 2020 from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District.

2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor, together with appropriate staff, to appear before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) in support of City Council’s decision to refuse the application, in the event that the application is appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.

3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal allows the appeals in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request that the Tribunal withhold its Order until such time as the Tribunal has been advised by the City Solicitor that:

a. the proposed Zoning By-law Amendments are in a form satisfactory to the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District and City Solicitor; and

b. a Section 37 Agreement has been executed and registered to secure Section  37 contributions and related matters satisfactory to the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District.

4. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and any other City staff to take such actions as necessary to give effect to the recommendations of this report.

This application proposes to amend City of Toronto Zoning By-law Nos. 438-86 and 569-2013 and Site Specific By-law No. 1117-2013 for the lands at 36-44 Eglinton Avenue West to permit a 65-storey (220 metre) mixed-use building, comprised of a 5-storey base building and 60-storey tower above.  The proposal contains a total of 663 dwelling units and 550 square metres of retail and office space. The total gross floor area would be 45,112 square metres resulting in a density of 32.27 times the lot area.  A total of 72 vehicular parking spaces are proposed in three levels of underground parking.

The proposed development represents overdevelopment of the site and is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), does not conform with the A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), and does not conform to the City's Official Plan and the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan.  The proposed development does not fit within the planned context of the Yonge-Eglinton Crossroads Character Area, which requires building heights to peak at the Crossroads (intersection of Yonge Street and Eglinton Avenue) with a gradual transition down in building heights in all directions.

This report reviews and recommends refusal of the application to amend the Zoning By-law. The subject site is not appropriate for the development of a tower of this scale. The proposed development does not achieve appropriate tower setbacks nor stepbacks.  Additionally, the proposed development does not minimize shadowing, particularly on Eglinton Park; lacks sufficient office replacement relative to what is existing on-site; the proposed tower is not meeting the intent of the City's Tall Building Design Guidelines; the outdoor amenity space that is provided is insufficient; and there is no pet amenity area.  In addition, the application does not have a satisfactory Functional Servicing Report to address servicing issues.

Therefore, for the reasons outlined in this report, it is recommended that the application be refused.

North York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council direct the City Solicitor and appropriate City Staff to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) to oppose the Zoning By-law Amendment application for 40 and 44 Broadway Avenue in its current form for reasons set out in the report (September 16, 2020), from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District.

2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate staff to seek revisions to the applications and continue discussions with the applicant in an attempt to resolve issues outlined in the report (September 16, 2020) from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District, within the context of the ongoing Broadway and Erskine Block Study, consistent with the Yonge Eglinton Secondary Plan (Official Plan Amendment No. 405), from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District regarding 40 and 44 Broadway Avenue, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and to report back to City Council on the outcome of discussions, if necessary.

3. In the event that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal allows the appeals in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request that the Tribunal withhold its Order until such time as the Tribunal has been advised by the City Solicitor that:

a. the proposed Zoning By-law Amendments are in a form satisfactory to the  Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District and City Solicitor;

b. a Section 37 Agreement has been executed and registered to secure Section 37 contributions and related matters satisfactory to the Acting Director,  Community Planning, North York District;

c. the owner has addressed the comments in the Engineering and Construction Services memo dated September 11, 2019, as applicable, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services; and

d.  all technical reports have been submitted and accepted by the relevant City Divisions.

4. City Council require that, in the event the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal approves the Zoning By-law Amendment application, in whole or in part, an on-site parkland dedication pursuant to Section 42 of the Planning Act be conveyed to the City, as described and set out in the report (September 16, 2020) from the Acting Director, Community Planning, North York District, to the satisfaction the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation.

5. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and necessary City staff to take such necessary steps, as required, to implement the foregoing.

On July 24, 2019, an application to amend the Zoning By-law was submitted to the City of Toronto for 40 and 44 Broadway Avenue which proposes to amend City of Toronto Zoning By-law Nos. 438-86 and 569-2013 to permit a 44-storey (131.9 metre) high residential building with a 4-storey base residential element that would be 14.96 metres in height at the north end of the site.  The proposed place of worship forms part of the base building element abutting Broadway Avenue and would be 16.86 metres in height.

On May 8, 2020, the applicant (Collecdev Inc.) appealed the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT).  The appeal was made without revisions to the original proposal and citing Council's failure to make a decision on the application within the timeframe prescribed by the Planning Act.  A pre-hearing conference has not yet been scheduled.

The proposed development is situated within the area subject to the ongoing Broadway & Erskine Block Study, as moved by City Council in July 2019, and part of the wider Midtown Zoning Review.  The Broadway & Erskine Block Study seeks to address matters such as the provision of consolidated site access, parkland location and configuration, pedestrian connections within the block and to the surrounding area, required servicing and transportation infrastructure, historic preservation, and appropriate urban design and compatible built form for the area.  The outcome of the Broadway & Erskine Block Study would guide the review of this application and future redevelopment of other sites within the block.

While the proposed building is within the height range of 35 to 50 storeys as identified by Policy 5.4.3(f) of the Yonge-Eglinton Secondary Plan, the proposal fails to meet the overall policy objectives of the Secondary Plan, particularly as it relates to policies regarding the Redpath Park Street Loop Character Area, Parks and Public Realm, Streetscape and Built Form.  The proposal at 44-storeys would be one of the tallest buildings in the area and the site is not located on the south side of Roehampton Avenue.  Heights are to generally decrease from south to north and east to west.

In its current form, the proposed development is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and does not conform with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019). 

This report recommends that the City Solicitor together with City Planning staff and other appropriate staff be directed to oppose the application, in its current form, at the LPAT.  This report also recommends that despite the applicant's appeal of the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the LPAT, City Planning staff continue to work with the applicant's team on revisions to the application to bring forward a proposal, within the context of the ongoing Broadway & Erskine Avenue Block Study that represents a supportable development of the site.

North York Community Council recommends that:  

1. City Council assume the services installed within Valliere Place and that the City formally assume the road within the Registered Plan of Subdivision 66M-2501.

2. City Council authorize the Director, Engineering Review, Engineering and Construction Services to release the performance guarantee held with respect to the municipal services in accordance with the Subdivision Agreement.

3. City Council direct that an assumption By-law be prepared to assume the public highway and municipal services within the Registered Subdivision Plan 66M-2501.

4. City Council authorize and direct the City Solicitor to register the assumption By-law in the Land Registry Office, at the expense of the Owner.

5. City Council authorize the appropriate City Officials to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

6. City Council authorize the appropriate City Officials to transfer ownership of the street lighting system constructed with Registered Plan of Subdivision 66M-2501 to Toronto Hydro.

This report recommends that the municipal services under the terms of the Subdivision Agreement for Plan 66M-2501, dated May 18, 2012 between Orchard Ridge (Heathview) G.P. Inc. and the City of Toronto be assumed by the City.

North York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the request for a permit to remove one privately owned tree located on the boundary line between the properties of 214 Snowdon Avenue and 216 Snowdown Avenue.

This report requests that City Council deny the request for a permit to remove one privately owned tree located on the boundary line between the properties of 214 and 216 Snowdon Avenue. The application has been made by the owner of 214 Snowdon Avenue. The application indicates the reasons for removal are to address concerns that the tree is damaging a deck structure, the tree's proximity to the house, and the potential for the tree's roots to cause foundation problems.

The subject tree is an American elm tree (Ulmus americana), measuring approximately 80 cm in diameter. The Private Tree By-law does not support the removal of this tree as it is healthy and maintainable.

The North York Community Council submits the Item to City Council without recommendation.

The North York Community Council:

1. Requested the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to report back jointly on the Section 37 agreement for the Don Mills Centre to the October 27, 2020 meeting of City Council.

On March 2, 2011, Official Plan Amendment No. 587 to the former City of North York Official Plan and Zoning By-law No. 342-2011(OMB) were approved by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) now continued as the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT). The planning instruments implement City Council's settlement on the redevelopment of the southern portion of the Don Mills Centre lands (Phase 2) with a mixed development including a local park and a public community centre.

Also in 2011 a Section 37 agreement was entered into between the owner of the lands, C/F Realty Holdings Limited (Cadillac Fairview) and the City (the "Section 37 Agreement").  As envisioned by the Section 37 Agreement, the deadline for certain key events has been extended by the parties on several occasions (see Item CC31.14, adopted by City Council on July 4, 5, 6 and 7, 2017 and Item CC5.8, adopted by City Council on March 27 and 28, 2019).

Certain key deadlines set out in the Section 37 Agreement will expire on October 30, 2020.

North York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council direct the City Solicitor to attend the Toronto Local Appeal Body, with appropriate City staff, in order to oppose the Appeal of the Committee of Adjustment's decision to approve the minor variances requested in Application No. A0243/20NY, and any other variances that may be requested, regarding 160 Ellerslie Avenue.

 
2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to retain such outside consultants as may be necessary to oppose the Appeal.
 

3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to attempt to negotiate a resolution regarding the Appeal, and that the City Solicitor be authorized to resolve the matter on behalf of the City, in her discretion, after consulting with the Ward Councillor and with the Director of Community Planning, North York District.

This motion will give the City Solicitor authority, along with appropriate City Staff, to attend the Toronto Local Appeal Body (the "TLAB") in order to oppose the Committee of Adjustment's (the "COA") decision approving the minor variance application regarding 160 Ellerslie Avenue (Application No. A0243/20NY) (the "Application").

The Application sought to construct a rear one-storey addition, a deck, and west side two-storey addition to the existing dwelling. The Application required a total of twelve (12) variances to Zoning By-law 569-2013 and former City of North York By-law 7625. The variances sought were to increase the dwelling's main wall height; increase the number of storeys from 2 to 3; reduce side-yard setbacks; increase the dwelling's overall height; reduce the front-yard setback; increase the area of rear platform; among other variances. Planning staff raised concerns with respect to the variances regarding the west side-yard setback and the rear platform. Planning staff recommended that the COA modify the west side-yard setback in order that the revised setback be 1.5 metres rather than 1.217 metres, and that the COA refuse the variance seeking to increase the area of the rear platform because it is not maintaining the neighbourhood's character.

On September 10, 2020, the COA modified and approved the Application; it responded to Planning staff's recommendation by modifying the west side-yard setback variance from 1.217 metres to 1.5 metres and approved all other variances without modification (the "Decision"). The owners of 160 Ellerslie Avenue (the "Appellant") appealed the Decision to the TLAB because they seek to reduce the west side-yard setback variance (the "Appeal").

The Appeal, which will be considered by the TLAB, seeks approval of the Application.

At this time, a TLAB hearing date is yet to be scheduled for this Appeal. 

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council adopt Official Plan Amendment No. 499 substantially in accordance with Attachment No. 1 to the Supplementary Report (September 29, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District.

2. City Council authorize that development may proceed by site-specific zoning by-law amendments that conform to the Golden Mile Secondary Plan, and request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to bring forward a Zoning By-law Amendment, as may be necessary, for the Golden Mile Secondary Plan area to comply with Official Plan Amendment No. 499 when the Amendment is in full force and effect.

3. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the General Manager, Transportation Services, to initiate a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study for the Golden Mile area, which will include options for potential modifications to Bartley Avenue/O'Connor Drive and consider comments received from area landowners.

4. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, the General Manager, Transportation Services, and the Chief Executive Officer, Toronto Transit Commission to study transit priority transit measures or higher order transit measures on Victoria Park Avenue and Warden Avenue.

5. City Council adopt the Golden Mile Urban Design Guidelines substantially in accordance with Attachment No. 2 to the Supplementary Report (September 29, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District and authorize the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to make any minor, technical or stylistic amendments/modifications as required to align with the Golden Mile Secondary Plan. 

6. City Council direct staff to use the Golden Mile Secondary Plan and Golden Mile Urban Design Guidelines in the evaluation of all current and new development proposals within its boundaries.

7. City Council receive the Infrastructure Identification Assessment in Attachment No. 7 of this report, and direct the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with appropriate agencies, boards, and divisions, to develop a Financial Strategy and Impact Analysis to support a coordinated approach to managing and promoting growth in the Secondary Plan that is integrated with long term infrastructure and financial planning and that considers the matters identified in the Infrastructure Identification Assessment for the Golden Mile Secondary Plan area, including the costs, potential funding and financing options and the financial impacts.

8. City Council authorizes the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to Official Plan Amendment No. 499 as may be required.

9. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff to take such necessary steps, as required, to implement City Council's decision.

Scarborough Community Council directed that: 

1. The Director, Community Planning Scarborough District, revise all maps and policies in the proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 499, prior to it being presented to City Council for adoption, to delete all references to the proposed Thermos Road realignment/reconfiguration, north of Eglinton Avenue East.

Emily Caldwell, Senior Planner, Community Planning, Scarborough District, gave a presentation on the Golden Mile Secondary Plan, Final Report and Supplementary Report.

The Golden Mile Secondary Plan (“GMSP”) Study was initiated by City Planning staff in May 2016, and generally consisted of the lands located along Eglinton Avenue East, between Victoria Park Avenue and Birchmount Road.  In April 2019, City Council expanded the study area boundary from 97 to 113 hectares to include additional lands east of Victoria Park Avenue within Wards 20 and 21, as well as approximately 4.3 hectares of land on the west side of Victoria Park Avenue within Ward 16 (Attachment 1: Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study Area Boundary). 

The Golden Mile has been influenced by agricultural, industrial and commercial eras of development.  The area became known as the "Golden Mile of Industry" during the post-World War II era with the construction of large-scale manufacturing buildings along Eglinton Avenue East, between Pharmacy Avenue and Birchmount Road.  Large-scale commercial construction generally occurred during the 1990's, replacing many of the former industrial buildings that fronted onto Eglinton Avenue East.

This report recommends that City Council adopt the Golden Mile Secondary Plan (the "Secondary Plan") and associated amendments in Official Plan Amendment ("OPA") No. 499. The Secondary Plan establishes a comprehensive planning framework for future development in the Secondary Plan Area (the "Plan Area") that sets out the long-term vision for a complete, liveable, connected, responsive, and prosperous mixed-use community.  The Secondary Plan directs anticipated growth to appropriate locations, identifies public realm and built form directions, and identifies and plans for community services and facilities necessary to meet the existing and future needs of the Plan Area. OPA No. 499 identifies a number of structuring elements through the re-designation of certain lands as Parks, and the identification of new public streets and widened/reconfigured existing public streets. These improvements are necessary structuring elements of the Plan Area and  will facilitate the creation of a complete community and allow for an appropriate level of intensification within the Plan Area.

The Secondary Plan facilitates the transformation of the Golden Mile, while maintaining its role as an important economic driver within the east end of Toronto and is envisioned as both a destination and a place for residents, workers, and visitors to live, work, shop, and play.

The Secondary Plan advances a vision for a new mixed-use community that has the potential to accommodate approximately 24,000 residential units, 43,000 residents and 19,000 jobs over the next 20+ years, in a mix of tall, mid and low-rise buildings ranging in height from 4 to 35 storeys (Attachment 5: Draft Official Plan Amendment No. 499, Golden Mile Secondary Plan). 

The Secondary Plan provides an overarching framework for land use, development capacity, a new street network and a parks and open space system, within which more detailed planning can be undertaken to distribute density on sites and blocks based on the core structuring elements. Given the overall size of the Secondary Plan area (approximately 113 hectares), this approach is appropriate to respond to specific conditions of multiple character areas and districts, including the need to acknowledge existing uses and required phasing of development. The Secondary Plan provides flexibility regarding the location and timing of dedication of public streets and built form. The provision of clear and specific policy direction at the macro level, coupled with flexibility in implementation at the context plan level, will allow development to proceed in a predictable and consistent manner while ensuring area specific conditions can be addressed.

The Secondary Plan is accompanied by Urban Design Guidelines for the Plan Area, which provide more detailed guidance to assist in the review of development applications and public realm improvements, and the implementation of the Secondary Plan.

OPA No. 499, including the Secondary Plan, has regard to matters of provincial interest under Section 2 of the Planning Act, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) ("PPS (2020)"), and conforms to A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019) ("Growth Plan (2019)"). OPA No. 499, including the Secondary Plan, is consistent with the general intent and purpose of, and conforms to, the City’s Official Plan.

At its meeting on July 17, 2020, Scarborough Community Council commenced a statutory public meeting on Official Plan Amendment No. 499 ("OPA 499"), including the Golden Mile Secondary Plan (“Secondary Plan") and associated Urban Design Guidelines for the 113-hectare Golden Mile Secondary Plan Area ("Plan Area") (Attachment 1: Golden Mile Secondary Plan Study Area Boundary to the Final Report dated July 25, 2020). 

Scarborough Community Council at that same meeting deferred consideration of the OPA 499 and the Golden Mile Secondary Plan - Final Report dated June 25, 2020, from the Director, Community Planning, Scarborough District, and directed staff to further consult with stakeholders on the final version of OPA 499 and report back to Scarborough Community Council, scheduled for October 16, 2020.

Since the Scarborough Community Council meeting on July 17, 2020, City staff have undertaken additional consultation with stakeholders in the Plan Area regarding the recommended Secondary Plan policies. Based on the feedback received during the consultations, staff have refined, where appropriate, some of the policies of OPA 499 in an attempt to address concerns raised by stakeholders, while maintaining the long-term vision for the Plan Area as a complete, liveable, connected, responsive, and prosperous mixed-use community.

This report provides supplementary information to the Final Report considered by Scarborough Community Council on July 17, 2020, and recommends that City Council adopt the Secondary Plan and associated amendments in Official Plan Amendment OPA 499. The report identifies the policy refinements that were undertaken by staff and provides clarification on the intent of certain policies that may have been misinterpreted by stakeholders.   

The Secondary Plan is accompanied by Urban Design Guidelines for the Plan Area which have also been revised to reflect the refinements to the Secondary Plan.  As an implementation tool for the Secondary Plan, the Urban Design Guidelines provide more detailed guidance to assist in the development and review of public and private initiatives in the Plan Area.

OPA 499, including the Secondary Plan, has regard to matters of provincial interest under Section 2 of the Planning Act, is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) ("PPS (2020)"), and conforms to A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020) ("Growth Plan (2020)"). OPA No. 499, including the Secondary Plan, is consistent with the general intent and purpose of, and conforms to, the City’s Official Plan.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location Permit at 1967 Lawrence Avenue East.

The purpose of this report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box Location Permit at 1967 Lawrence Avenue East.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council rescind the existing maximum one-hour parking regulation in effect from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on the east side of Kingston Road, between Cliffside Drive and Midland Avenue.

2. City Council rescind the existing maximum one-hour parking regulation in effect at all times on the north side of Kingston Road, between a point 39.5 metres east of Eastwood Avenue and Birchcliff Avenue.

3. City Council rescind the existing maximum one-hour parking regulation in effect at all times on the south side of Kingston Road, between Birchcliff Avenue and a point 70 metres east.

4. City Council rescind the existing maximum one-hour parking regulation in effect at all times on the south side of Kingston Road, between a point 61 metres east of Wood Glen Road and Haig Avenue.

As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates a transit service on Kingston Road, City Council approval of this report is required.

The purpose of this report is to rescind the existing maximum one-hour parking regulation in effect from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday to Friday on the east side of Kingston Road, between Cliffside Drive and Midland Avenue.  Removing the maximum one-hour parking regulation will address the business owners' concerns and allow for statutory maximum three-hour on-street parking for their customers.

During this investigation staff also noted several discrepancies in the existing parking regulations for Kingston Road, between Wood Glen Road and Birchmount Road.  The proposed amendments in Recommendations 2 through 4 will correct these discrepancies.

Scarborough Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the request for a permit to remove one privately owned tree located at 57 Pegasus Trail.

This report requests that City Council deny the request for a permit to remove one privately owned tree located at 57 Pegasus Trail. The application indicates the reason for removal is to address concerns over the declining health of the tree, damage to cars caused by falling debris, and damage to the driveway.

The subject tree is a white pine (Pinus strobus), measuring 46 cm in diameter. The Private Tree By-law does not support the removal of this tree as it is healthy and maintainable.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council amend former City of Toronto Zoning By-law 438-86, as amended for the lands at 74, 82, 130, 150, 160 and 162 Dunn Avenue, 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue, and 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 5 to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

2. City Council amend City-Wide Zoning By-law 569-2013 for the lands at 74, 82, 130, 150, 160 and 162 Dunn Avenue, 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue, and 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 6 to the report (September 21, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

4. City Council authorizes the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Zoning By-law Amendments as may be required.

5. Before introducing the Bills to City Council for enactment, City Council require the owner to enter into an Agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act for the purpose of securing the following matters as a legal convenience to support the development, with no cost pass-through to the residents of the existing rental buildings, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor:

a. The owner shall secure and maintain twelve existing affordable rental dwelling units collectively on the properties at 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 Close Avenue, 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue and 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue as rental housing for a period of at least 49 years from the date that the Zoning By-law comes into full force and effect. The owner covenants and agrees that during the 49-year period, it shall not apply to convert any of the existing rental dwelling units to a non-residential purpose, demolish any of the existing rental dwelling units or register the existing affordable rental dwelling units under the Condominium Act, 1998, without replacing any such affordable rental dwelling units on the Lands;

 
b. The owner acknowledges that it shall maintain the existing affordable rental dwelling units at 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 Close Avenue, and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue and or any replacement units in accordance with the City's Property Standards By-law (Chapter 629 of the Toronto Municipal Code), all to the satisfaction of the Executive Director, Municipal Licensing and Standards 

 
c. The owner acknowledges that it shall maintain the existing affordable rental dwelling units at 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15 Close Avenue, and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue or any replacement units in accordance with the Ontario Building Code, O Reg 332/12, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building 

 
d. The owner agrees that if a planning application is submitted to the City to increase the existing residential permissions on any of the lands municipally known as 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue, and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue, Council may, in its sole unfettered discretion, require the replacement of any of the existing affordable rental dwelling units proposed to be demolished and any rental dwelling units that have been demolished or deemed uninhabitable as of the date of the report supporting this by-law. For clarity, such rental dwelling units that have been demolished or deemed uninhabitable were previously located at 1, 3 and 17 Close Avenue;

 
e. Prior to final Site Plan Approval for the addition to the long-term care facility, the owner shall provide a Construction Mitigation and Tenant Communication Strategy and, thereafter, the owner shall implement such strategy; and

f. Prior to issuance of any below grade permit, require the owner to submit a construction management plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Transportation Services and the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District, in consultation with the Ward Councillor, and thereafter shall implement the plan during the course of construction.  The Construction Management Plan will include, but not be limited to, the size and location of construction staging areas, location and function of gates, information on concrete pouring, lighting details to ensure that safety lighting does not negatively impact adjacent residences, construction vehicle parking and queuing locations, refuse storage, site security, site supervisor contact information, a communication strategy with the surrounding community, and any other matters requested by the Manager, Transportation Services and the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District, in consultation with the Ward Councillor.

The Toronto and East York Community Council held a statutory public meeting on October 15, 2020 and notice was given in accordance with the Planning Act.

This application proposes to construct a 6-storey, 192-bed long-term care addition to the University Health Network's (UHN) existing four-storey Lakeside Long-term Care Centre at 150 Dunn Avenue, and secure the rental tenure of all existing rental dwelling units located at 74 and 82 Dunn Avenue, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Close Avenue and 74 and 78 Springhurst Avenue.

The UHN owns the majority of properties in the block bounded by King Street West, Close Avenue, Dunn Avenue and Springhurst Avenue. The properties are developed with both institutional and house-form buildings, including the EW Bickle Centre for Complex Continuing Care, the existing Lakeside Long-term Care Centre, and the Sunflower House Child Care Centre fronting onto Dunn Avenue. UHN has indicated their intention to continue with institutional uses on these 130, 150, 160 and 162 Dunn Avenue properties for the foreseeable future. UHN has also indicated their intention to continue residential use on the house-form buildings fronting onto Close, Dunn and Springhurst Avenues. 

The original Zoning By-law Application proposed an O-shaped addition to the long-term care facility, inclusive of one level of underground parking, and comprised the lands at 130, 150, 160 and 162 Dunn Avenue. The UHN has revised their application, now proposing a C-shaped building with a south-facing courtyard, and removal of the underground parking. The revised proposal represents a scale of development that is appropriate for the neighbourhood, fits in with the built form character of various building types and heights within the surrounding area, and serves to create much needed additional long-term care service in the city.

The revised proposal now includes all 17 properties within the block bounded by Dunn Avenue, Close Avenue, Springhurst Avenue, and King Street West. The revision of the application to include all UHN's properties is for the purpose of securing the rental tenure of all existing rental dwelling units contained within the buildings owned and operated by UHN in a Section 37 Agreement to be registered on title to the UHN lands. This proposal supports the City's objective of preserving affordable rental housing.

This report is related to a separate report being prepared by the Housing Secretariat that is scheduled to be submitted to the October 20th Planning and Housing Committee meeting, and then considered at the October meeting of City Council. The Housing Secretariat report will set out a proposed framework for a City / UHN partnership to protect the existing residential uses on the UHN lands, and create new supportive housing opportunities as part of a larger future redevelopment of the lands. The first phase of that work is proposed to be a visioning and master planning exercise of the UHN lands in consultation with the local Councillor and community.

The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conforms with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019).

This report reviews and recommends approval of the application to amend the Zoning By-law.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council approve the Rental Housing Demolition Application under Chapter 667 of Toronto Municipal Code to permit the demolition of seven (7) rental dwelling units at 239-251 Balliol Street, subject to the following conditions:

a. The owner shall provide tenant relocation and assistance to all Eligible Tenants of the seven (7) existing rental dwelling units proposed to be demolished at 239-251 Balliol Street, including the right to return to a rental dwelling unit of a similar unit type and at a similar rent, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning; and

b. The owner shall enter into, and register on title at 239-251 and 265 Balliol Street, an agreement pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006 and an agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act, to secure the condition outlined in Recommendation 1.a above, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

2. City Council authorize the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to issue Preliminary Approval of the application under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code for the demolition of the seven (7) existing rental dwelling units at 239-251 Balliol Street after all of the following have occurred:

a. The conditions in Recommendation 1 above have been fully satisfied;

b. The Zoning By-law Amendment has come into full force and effect;

c. The issuance of the Notice of Approval Conditions for site plan approval by the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division or designate pursuant to Section 114 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006;

d. The issuance of excavation and shoring permits for the approved structure on site;

e. The execution and registration of agreements pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006 and Section 37 of the Planning Act securing the condition in Recommendation 1.a above; and

f. The City has received confirmation that all seven (7) of the existing rental dwelling units proposed to be demolished are vacant.

3. City Council authorize the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building to issue a Rental Housing Demolition permit under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code after the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning has issued the Preliminary Approval referred to in Recommendation 2 above.

4. City Council authorize the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building to issue a residential demolition permit under Section 33 of the Planning Act and Chapter 363 of the Toronto Municipal Code for 239-251 Balliol Street after the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning has issued the Preliminary Approval referred to in Recommendation 2 above, which may be included in the Rental Housing Demolition permit pursuant to section 6.2 of Chapter 363, on condition that:

a. The owner removes all debris and rubble from the site immediately after demolition;

b. The owner erects solid construction hoarding to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building;

c. The owner erects the proposed new rental building no later than four (4) years from the date that the demolition of such building commences; and

d. Should the owner fail to complete the proposed new rental building within the time specified in Recommendation 4.c. above, the City Clerk shall be entitled to enter on the collector’s roll, as with municipal property taxes, an amount equal to the sum of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) per dwelling unit for which a demolition permit is issued, and that such amount shall, until payment, be a lien or charge upon the land for which the demolition permit is issued.

5. City Council authorize the appropriate City officials to take such actions as are necessary to implement the recommendations above, including execution of the Section 111 agreement and other related agreements.

The Toronto and East York Community Council held a statutory public meeting on October 15, 2020 and notice was given in accordance with the Planning Act.

A Rental Housing Demolition application (17 224019 STE 22 RH) has been submitted under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006 for a residential rental property at 239-251 and 265 Balliol Street.

The application proposes to demolish seven rental townhouse units at 239-251 Balliol Street. A new purpose-built rental apartment building comprised of 233 rental dwelling units, of which approximately 10 percent would be affordable rental units, would be built on the site of the seven townhouse units. The existing rental apartment building adjacent to the townhouses at 265 Balliol Street will be retained.

The properties are also the subject of a Zoning By-law Amendment application
(17 223999 STE 22 OZ), which was appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) on March 2, 2018 (Case No. PL180213). A settlement offer was endorsed by City Council on January 29, 2020. Council deferred making a decision on the Rental Housing Demolition application and directed staff to request the LPAT to withhold its final Order on the Zoning By-law Amendment appeal until Council has authorized the Rental Housing Demolition application and the owner has entered into, and registered on title, an agreement pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006.

On August 4, 2020, the LPAT issued its Decision, approving the Zoning By-law Amendment application in principle and withholding the final Order until outstanding matters, including the Rental Housing Demolition application, are resolved.

This report recommends approval of the Rental Housing Demolition application under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code and the demolition permit under Chapter 363 of the Toronto Municipal Code, subject to conditions.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council amend the Official Plan, for the lands at 2100 to 2110 Yonge Street and 8 to 12 Manor Road West substantially in accordance with the draft Official Plan Amendment attached as Attachment 5 to the report (September 18, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

2. City Council amend Zoning By-law 438-86, for the lands at 2100 to 2110 Yonge Street and 8 to 12 Manor Road West substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 6 to the report (September 18, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

3. City Council amend City of Toronto Zoning By-law 569-2013 for the lands at 2100 to 2110 Yonge Street and 8 to 12 Manor Road West substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 7 to the report (September 18, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

4. City Council authorizes the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments as may be required.

5. Prior to the introduction of the bills for such Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendment by City Council, the owner shall:

a. Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by RAW Design, dated April 13, 2020 and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated April 6, 2018 with the HIA Addendum, dated April 24, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., subject to and in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 5.b. all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

 
b. Provide a detailed Conservation Plan prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment and HIA Addendum for 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated April 6, 2018 and April 24, 2020 respectively, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

6. City Council advise the owner that prior to final Site Plan Approval the owner shall:

 
a. Provide final site plan drawings substantially in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 5. b. above to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

 
b. Provide a Heritage Lighting Plan that describes how the exterior of the heritage property will be sensitively illuminated to enhance its heritage character to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

 
c. Provide a detailed landscape plan for the subject property, satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

 
d. Provide an Interpretation Plan for the subject property, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning; and

 
e. Submit a Signage Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

7. City Council approve the Rental Housing Demolition Application File No. 18 178163 STE 22 RH in accordance with Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code and pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006 which allows for the demolition of seven (7) existing rental dwelling units located at 2100-2110 Yonge Street and 8-12 Manor Road West, subject to the following conditions:

 
a. The owner shall provide and maintain seven (7) replacement rental dwelling units on the subject site for a period of at least 20 years beginning from the date that each replacement rental dwelling unit is first occupied and, during which time, no application may be submitted to the City for condominium registration, or for any other conversion to a non-rental housing purpose, or for demolition without providing for replacement during the, at minimum, 20 year period; the seven (7) replacement rental dwelling units shall be comprised of six (6) one-bedroom units and one (1) two-bedroom units, as generally illustrated in the Architectural Plans prepared by RAW DESIGN submitted to the City Planning Division dated April 28, 2020. Any revision to these plans shall be to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

 
b. The owner shall, as part of the seven (7) replacement rental dwelling units required in Recommendation 7.a. above, provide at least six (6) one-bedroom replacement rental dwelling units at mid-range rents, as currently defined in the City's Official Plan, all for a period of at least 10 years beginning from the date of first occupancy of each unit. The rents of the remaining one (1) two-bedroom replacement rental dwelling unit shall be unrestricted;

 
c. the owner shall provide tenant relocation and assistance to all Post Application Tenants, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

 
d. The owner shall provide tenants of all seven (7) replacement rental dwelling units with access to, and use of, all indoor and outdoor amenities in the proposed 12-storey mixed-use building at no extra charge. Access to, and use of, these amenities shall be on the same terms and conditions as any other resident of the building without the need to pre-book or pay a fee, unless specifically required as a customary practice for private bookings;

 
e. The owner shall provide ensuite laundry in each replacement rental dwelling unit within the proposed mixed-use building at no additional cost to tenants;

 
f. The owner shall provide central air conditioning in each replacement rental dwelling unit within the proposed mixed-use building;

 
g. The owner shall provide tenants of the seven (7) replacement rental dwelling units with access to all bicycle parking on the same terms and conditions as any other resident of the proposed mixed-use building;

 
h. The owner shall provide seven (7) storage lockers to tenants of the replacement rental dwelling units; and

 
i. The owner shall enter into, and register on title at 2100-2110 Yonge Street and 8-12 Manor Road West, one or more agreement(s), to secure the conditions outlined in Recommendations 7.a through 7.h. above, including an agreement pursuant to Section 111 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006, all to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

8. City Council authorize the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to issue Preliminary Approval of the Rental Housing Demolition Permit under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code for the demolition of the seven (7) existing rental dwelling units located at 2100-2110 Yonge Street and 8-12 Manor Road West after all the following have occurred:

 
a. All conditions in Recommendation 7 above have been fully satisfied and secured;

 
b. The issuance of the Notice of Approval Conditions for site plan approval by the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning or designate, pursuant to Section 114 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006;

 
c. The issuance of excavation and shoring permits (conditional or full permit) for the approved development on the site;

d. The owner has confirmed, in writing, that all existing rental dwelling units proposed to be demolished are vacant; and

 
e. The execution and registration of an agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act securing Recommendations 7.a. through 7.i. above and any other requirements of the Zoning-Bylaw Amendment.

9. City Council authorize the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building to issue a Rental Housing Demolition Permit under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code after the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning has given Preliminary Approval referred to in Recommendation 8 above.

10. City Council authorize the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building to issue a Residential Demolition Permit under Section 33 of the Planning Act and Chapter 363 of the Toronto Municipal Code for 2100-2110 Yonge St and 8-12 Manor Rd West after the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division has given Preliminary Approval referred to in Recommendation 8 above, which may be included in the Rental Housing Demolition Permit under Chapter 667 pursuant to section 6.2 of Chapter 363, on condition that:

 
a. The owner removes all debris and rubble from the site immediately after demolition;

 
b. The owner erects solid construction hoarding to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official and Executive Director, Toronto Building;

 
c. The owner erects the proposed mixed-use building on site no later than four (4) years from the date that the demolition of such building commences, subject to the timeframe being extended to the discretion of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division; and

 
d. Should the owner fail to complete the proposed mixed-use building within the time specified in Recommendation 10.c. above, the City Clerk shall be entitled to enter on the collector’s roll, as with municipal property taxes, an amount equal to the sum of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) per dwelling unit for which a demolition permit is issued, and that such amount shall, until payment, be a lien or charge upon the land for which the demolition permit is issued.

11. In addition to matters outline in Recommendation 7 above, before introducing the necessary Bills to City Council for enactment, City Council require the owner enter into an agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act, to require the owner to provide a minimum of 15-percent of all new units in the proposed 12-storey mixed-use building as three-bedroom units and a minimum of 30-percent of all new units in the proposed 12-storey mixed-use building as two-bedroom units.

12. Prior to Site Plan Approval, City Council require the applicant shall submit to the City for review and acceptance, in consultation with the Ward Councillor and the local community, a Construction Management Plan, including a detailed construction communication plan.

 
13. City Council authorize the appropriate City officials to take such actions as are necessary to implement the recommendations above, including execution of the Section 111 Agreement, Section 37 Agreement, and any other necessary agreement(s).

The Toronto and East York Community Council held a statutory public meeting on October 15, 2020 and notice was given in accordance with the Planning Act.

This application proposes a new 12-storey mixed-use building with 91 residential uses, (inclusive of seven (7) replacement rental dwelling units), 287 square metres of retail space at grade and 22 vehicular parking spaces accessed from Manor Road West at 2100-2110 Yonge Street and 8-12 Manor Road West. The proposal provides 7 replacement rental units and includes conservation of the three-dimensional integrity of a heritage resource in situ by retaining the façades along Yonge Street and Manor Road West.  The subject site includes the rear public lane which the applicant proposes to purchase from the City.

This Rental Housing Demolition application proposes to demolish two existing 2-storey mixed-use buildings containing a total of eight (8) existing residential dwelling units, of which seven (7) are currently rental dwelling units and one (1) dwelling unit is owner-occupied. The seven (7) rental dwelling units will be replaced in the new development.

The proposed development is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conforms with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020).

The proposal represents an appropriate redevelopment of the site with a mix of uses, built form and public realm that are compatible with the surrounding context.

This report reviews and recommends approval of the application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and approval of the Rental Housing Demolition Permit under Chapter 667 of the Toronto Municipal Code and the Residential Demolition Permit under Chapter 363 of the Toronto Municipal Code, subject to conditions.

The Toronto and East York Community Council submits the item to City Council without recommendation.

The Toronto and East York Community Council requested the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York Community Council, in consultation with relevant City divisions, to report directly to the October 27, 2020 meeting of City Council; such report to include responses to the following:

a. What is the role of the Province of Ontario in this application?

b. How does the Province’s role impact the role of City Planning in considering this application?

c. Is there enough parkland or greenspace on the application site?

d. What is the planning rationale for a 5.5 metre separation between 80 Mill Street and 90 Mill Street?

The Toronto and East York Community Council held a statutory public meeting on October 15, 2020 and notice was given in accordance with the Planning Act.

This application proposes to amend the Zoning By-law to permit two 8 to 13-storey buildings and one 11-storey building with a total 80,800 square metres of gross floor area consisting of: 870 residential units, of which 261 are affordable; 3,129 square metres of retail gross floor area; and a 481 square metre community space at 373 Front Street East and 90 Mill Street. The proposal also provides for privately-owned publicly accessible spaces in the form of a pedestrian walkway connecting Front Street East to the future east-west local road, and two courtyards on either side of the pedestrian walkway. An application to lift the "(h)" holding symbol in the Zoning By-law for the subject lands has also been applied to permit the development as proposed.

The proposed affordable housing component of this application are approved for Open Door incentives including exemption from the payment of certain development charges and fees, and property tax rebates for the affordability period of 99 years, all part of the Provincial Affordable Housing Lands Program. The affordable housing component is also consistent with the Affordable Housing Delivery Agreement for the development within the West Don Lands Precinct Plan area.

The proposed development as a whole is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conforms with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020).

This report reviews and recommends approval of the applications to amend the Zoning By-law and the lifting of the "(h)" symbol.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the "LPAT") respecting the site specific Zoning By-law Amendment Appeal for 578-580 King Street West in support of the revised proposal, as described in the Issue Background section of the report (September 18, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District and appended as Attachments 5-8 to the report (September 18, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

2. City Council instruct the City Solicitor to request that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal withhold its Order on the Zoning By-law amendment until such time as the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal has been advised by the City Solicitor that:

a. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment is in a form satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the City Solicitor;

b. All site servicing and site access matters have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services and the General Manager, Transportation Services;

c.  The owner agrees to pay for and construct any improvements to the municipal infrastructure in connection with the site servicing report, as accepted by the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, should it be determined that upgrades to such infrastructure are required to support this development;

d. The owner has entered into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 578-580 King Street West substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by prepared by Audax Architecture Inc. dated August 4, 2020, submitted with the Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by Goldsmith Borgal and Co. Ltd. Architects, dated August 4, 2020, or otherwise revised in accordance with a settlement offer or Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Order, subject to and in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 2.e. above, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor;

e. The owner has provided a detailed Conservation Plan prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment for 578-580 King Street West, dated August 4, 2020, prepared by Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd. Architects, or otherwise a conservation strategy revised in accordance with a settlement offer or Local Planning Appeal Tribunal Order, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

f. The owner withdraw their appeal of the King-Spadina Secondary Plan (2020); and

g. The owner withdraw their appeal of the King-Spadina Heritage Conservation District Plan.

3. That, prior to final Site Plan approval for the development contemplated at 578-580 King Street West, City Council require the owner to:

a. Provide final site plan drawings substantially in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 2.e. above to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

b. Provide an Interpretation Plan for the subject property, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

c. Provide a Heritage Lighting Plan that describes how the exterior of the heritage property will be sensitively illuminated to enhance its heritage character to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning; and

d. Provide a Signage Plan for the subject property and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

4. Prior to the issuance of any below-grade building permit, the owner shall be required to submit a construction management plan to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Transportation Services and the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District, in consultation with the Ward Councillor, and thereafter shall implement the plan during the course of construction.  The Construction Management Plan will include, but not be limited to, the size and location of construction staging areas, location and function of gates, information on concrete pouring, lighting details to ensure that safety lighting does not negatively impact adjacent residences, construction vehicle parking and queuing locations, refuse storage, site security, site supervisor contact information, a communication strategy with the surrounding community, and any other matters requested by the General Manager, Transportation Services or the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District, in consultation with the Ward Councillor.

The revised Zoning Amendment application for 578-580 King Street West proposes to permit a 9-storey office building containing retail uses on the ground floor. The development would have a height of 36.4 metres (41.1 including the mechanical penthouse). The site is currently occupied by a 2-storey heritage building. The front (King Street West) façade and the front portion of the east façade of the existing heritage building are proposed to be retained in situ. 

As is detailed in the Proposal section of this report, the revised proposal is significantly different from the original proposal submitted by the applicant on September 14, 2018, which staff did not support.

The revised proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and conforms with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020).

This report reviews the revised proposal and recommends that City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City Staff to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the "LPAT") in support of the revised proposal, subject to conditions as outlined in the Recommendations section of this report.

A hearing at the LPAT has been scheduled for November 24, 2020. Should City Council adopt the recommendations of this report, the LPAT may convert the hearing into a settlement hearing.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1.  City Council direct the City Solicitor, together with City Planning staff and appropriate City Staff to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing to oppose the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Control applications in their current form.

2. City Council direct City Staff to continue discussions with the applicant in an attempt to resolve outstanding matters as identified in the report (September 21, 2020), from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District, including issues regarding appropriate transition to and coordination with adjacent properties.

3. In the event the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal allows the appeals of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment, in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal to withhold its final Order on the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications until:

a. the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments are provided in a final form and with content satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor;

b. the owner and the City have agreed upon an appropriate Section 37 community benefit contribution to be provided by the owner to the City under the authority of Section 37 of the Planning Act, and such community benefit has been secured in a Section 37 agreement with the City that has been executed and registered on title to the property, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the City Solicitor;

c. the owner has addressed all outstanding issues identified by Engineering and Construction Services, Transportation Services, Solid Waste Management Services, Toronto Water, and Fire Services as outlined in the memo dated February 20, 2020 from Engineering and Construction Services relating to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments and Site Plan Control applications, including submitting a revised Functional Servicing Report, Storm Water Management Report and Hydro-geological Report, to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

d. the owner has entered into an agreement or agreements with the City securing the design and the provision of financial securities for any upgrades or required improvements to the existing municipal infrastructure and/or provision of new municipal infrastructure identified in the approved engineering reports referenced in recommendation 3.c. above, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, should it be determined that improvements or upgrades and/or new infrastructure are required to support the development;

 e. the owner has submitted a revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study acceptable to, and to the satisfaction of, the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

f. the owner has revised all plans and reports to show the location of Toronto Transit Commission infrastructure adjacent to the development site and ensure that a 3 metre clearance is maintained between the proposed development, including all below grade and above grade structures, to all Toronto Transit Commission infrastructure, all to the satisfaction of the Manager of Technical Review, Toronto Transit Commission, and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

g. the owner has withdrawn their appeal of Official Plan Amendment 183 - North Downtown Yonge Site and Area Specific Policy 382; and

h. the owner has withdrawn their appeal of Official Plan Amendment 231 with respect to office replacement policies.

4.  In the event the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal allows the appeal of the Site Plan Control application, in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal to withhold its final Order on the Site Plan Control application until:

a. the owner has revised the Site Plan to address all outstanding issues, including issues identified in the Engineering and Construction Services memo dated February 20, 2020, the revised Pedestrian Level Wind Study, and the revised plans and reports showing the location of the Toronto Transit Commission infrastructure, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services, Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, and the Manager, Technical Review, Toronto Transit Commission;

b. the owner and the City have entered into a Site Plan Agreement securing conditions of site plan approval, all to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning;

c. the City Solicitor has advised the Tribunal in writing that all pre-approval conditions have been fulfilled by the owner.

5. City Council authorize City Planning staff to re-schedule the community consultation meeting for the application located at 20-26 Maitland Street together with the Ward Councillor prior to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing on the appealed applications.

6. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate City staff to take such necessary steps, as required, to implement the recommendations above.

The Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control applications propose the redevelopment of the site at 20-26 Maitland Street with a 45-storey mixed use building. The proposal includes 527 residential condominium dwelling units and 275 square metres of retail space at grade.

The Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment application was deemed complete on October 23, 2019. The Site Plan Control Application was deemed complete on November 26, 2019.  The Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Control applications were appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the "LPAT") on March 14, 2020 due to the City's failure to make a decision within the prescribed time period set out in the Planning Act.

This report recommends that the City Solicitor, together with City Planning staff, and other appropriate City staff, attend the LPAT in opposition to the current proposal. As proposed, the application is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), does not conform to the Growth Plan (2020), and does not conform to the City's Official Plan.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the City Solicitor, together with City Planning staff and other appropriate staff, to oppose the Zoning By-law amendment application for 60 Mill Street, file no. 19 264586 STE 13 OZ, and attend any Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearings in opposition to such appeal, and retain such experts as the City Solicitor may determine are appropriate.

2. City Council authorize City staff to continue discussions with the applicant on a revised proposal, including a settlement at the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, which addresses the issues set out in the report (September 21, 2020) from the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District.

3. In the event the Local Planning Tribunal allows the appeal in whole or in part, City Council direct the City Solicitor to request the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal to withhold the issuance of any Order approving the Zoning By-law amendment until:

a. The owner has provided draft by-laws in a form and with content satisfactory to the Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District and the City Solicitor;

b. The owner has provided a revised functional servicing report and revised hydrogeological report, such reports to be reviewed to the satisfaction of the Chief Engineer and Executive Director, Engineering and Construction Services;

c. The owner be required to enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 60 Mill Street, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Preservation Services including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor prior to the Zoning By-law amendment coming into full force and effect; and

d. The owner and the City have had an opportunity to discuss and agree on community benefits to be provided in accordance with Section 37 of the Planning Act, and the owner enters into and registers on title an agreement to secure appropriate services, facilities, and/or matters pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act as may be required by the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Ward Councillor.

4. City Council authorize the City Solicitor and other City staff to take any necessary steps to implement the recommendations above.

The purpose of this report is to request direction from City Council on the pending Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") hearing on the application to amend the Zoning By-law for the property at 60 Mill Street to permit a 31-storey building with a height of 115.1 metres, containing 392 hotel suites resulting in 26,944 square metres of non-residential gross floor area and 80 vehicular parking spaces within a 5-level underground garage. The existing Rack House D building, a heritage property designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and subject to a Heritage Easement Agreement, is proposed to be altered and incorporated as part of the development. 

Following a review of the application, staff have concluded that the proposed development is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2020) and does not conform with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020). Staff have also concluded the proposed development does not conform to the policy direction of the Official Plan and King-Parliament Secondary Plan. The proposal represents overdevelopment, does not respond appropriately to its existing and planned context and does not meet the city-wide Tall Building guidelines.

On August 11, 2020, the Zoning By-law amendment application was appealed to the LPAT by the applicant pursuant to Section 34(11) of the Planning Act due to the City not making a decision within the prescribed timeframe. It is recommended that the City oppose the application in its current form at the LPAT. It is also recommended that staff continue discussions with the applicant to achieve revisions to the proposal that address the issues identified in this report.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that: 

1. City Council state its intention to designate the property at 578 King Street West under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act in accordance with the Statement of Significance (Reasons for Designation) as Attachment 4 attached to the report (September 3, 2020) from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

2. If there are no objections to the designation, City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the bill in Council designating the property under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

3. If there are objections to the designation, City Council direct the City Clerk to refer the designation to the Conservation Review Board.

4. If the designation is referred to the Conservation Review Board, City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate staff to attend any hearing held by the Conservation Review Board in support of Council's decision on the designation of the property.

5. City Council authorize the entering into of a Heritage Easement Agreement under Section 37 of the Ontario Heritage Act with the owner of 578 King Street West in a form and content satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

6. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the necessary bill in Council authorizing the entering into Heritage Easement Agreement for the property at 578 King Street West.

7. City Council approve the alterations to the heritage property at 578 King Street West in accordance with Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, to allow for the construction of a mixed use building that includes alterations to the heritage property in conjunction with an appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) for the requested amendment to the Zoning By-law for the lands municipally known as 578 King Street West, with such alterations substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by Audax Architecture Inc. dated August 4, 2020, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated August 4, 2020 prepared by Goldsmith Borgal and Co. Ltd. Architects, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, all subject to and in accordance with a Conservation Plan satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, and subject to the following additional conditions:

a. Prior to issuance of an Local Planning Appeal Tribunal order for the Zoning By-law Amendment for the lands, the owner shall:

1. Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the property at 578 King Street West, substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by Audax Architecture Inc. dated August 4, 2020, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated August 4, 2020, prepared by Goldsmith Borgal and Co. Ltd. Architects, subject to and in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 7.a.2. below, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

2. Provide a detailed Conservation Plan prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated August 4, 2020, prepared by Goldsmith Borgal and Co. Ltd. Architects, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

3. That the owner withdraw their appeal(s) of the King-Spadina Heritage Conservation District Plan, and if not an appellant, but rather a party to such appeals, the owner shall withdraw as a party and not seek any party or participant status on the appeals, as it relates to the development site.

b. Prior to Final Site Plan approval in connection with the Zoning By-law Amendment for the Lands, or any part of the Lands, the owner shall:

1. Provide final site plan drawings substantially in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 7.a.2 above to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

2. Provide an Interpretation Plan for the subject property, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

3. Provide a Heritage Lighting Plan that describes how the exterior of the heritage property will be sensitively illuminated to enhance its heritage character to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

4. Provide a Signage Plan for the subject property and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

c. That prior to the issuance of any permit for all or any part of the property at 578 King Street West, including a heritage permit or a building permit, but excluding permits for repairs and maintenance and usual and minor works for the existing heritage building as are acceptable to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, the owner shall:

1. Have obtained final approval for the necessary Zoning By-law Amendment required for the subject property, such Amendment to have come into full force and effect.

2. Provide building permit drawings, including notes and specifications for the conservation and protective measures keyed to the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 7.a.2. above including a description of materials and finishes, to be prepared by the project architect and a qualified heritage consultant to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

3. Provide a Letter of Credit, including provision for upwards indexing, in a form and amount and from a bank satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning to secure all work included in the approved Conservation, Interpretation and Lighting Plans.

d. That prior to the release of the Letter of Credit required in Recommendation 7.c.3. above the owner shall:

1. Provide a letter of substantial completion prepared and signed by a qualified heritage consultant confirming that the required conservation work and the required interpretive work has been completed in accordance with the Conservation, Interpretation and Lighting Plans and that an appropriate standard of conservation has been maintained, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

2. Provide replacement Heritage Easement Agreement photographs to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

The property at 578 King Street West (including the entrance addresses at 580 King Street West) is situated on the north side of King Street West between Portland Street and Spadina Avenue. The property contains a two-storey factory-type building on a raised basement with Edwardian Classical style details, designed by Burke and Horwood in 1904-6. The property at 578 King Street West was listed on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register in May 2005 and it is located in the proposed King-Spadina Heritage Conservation District.

This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate the property at 578 King Street West under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement.

This report also recommends that City Council approve the alterations proposed for the property at 578 King Street West in accordance with Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act to allow for the construction of a nine-storey office and commercial building in connection with an appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") of an application to amend the Zoning By-law.

The conservation strategy proposed for the heritage property retains the primary street-facing elevation of the building with a portion of the east return wall.

The property at 578 King Street West (including the entrance addresses at 580 King Street West) is situated on the north side of King Street West between Portland Street and Spadina Avenue. The property contains a two-storey factory-type building on a raised basement with Edwardian Classical style details, designed by Burke and Horwood in 1904-6. The property at 578 King Street West was listed on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register in May 2005 and it is located in the proposed King-Spadina Heritage Conservation District.

This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate the property at 578 King Street West under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement.

This report also recommends that City Council approve the alterations proposed for the property at 578 King Street West in accordance with Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act to allow for the construction of a nine-storey office and commercial building in connection with an appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") of an application to amend the Zoning By-law.

The conservation strategy proposed for the heritage property retains the primary street-facing elevation of the building with a portion of the east return wall.
 
Background Information
(September 3, 2020) Report and Attachments 1-5 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning - Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to a Designated Property and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 578 King Street West
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-156531.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Presentation from the Heritage Planner, Heritage Preservation, Urban Design, City Planning -Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to a Designated Property and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 578 King Street West
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-157065.pdf)

 
Communications
(September 28, 2020) Submission from Emad Ghattas, GBCA Architects (PB.Supp.PB17.3.1)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119818.pdf)

 
Speakers
Emad Ghattas, GBCA Architects
Gianpiaro Pugliese                

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council include the property at 80 Queen's Park on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register.

2. City Council state its intention to designate the property at 80 Queen's Park (Edward Johnson Building) under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act in accordance with the Statement of Significance (Reasons for Designation) contained in Attachment 4 of the September 2, 2020 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, City Planning.

3 City Council state its intention to designate the property at 84 Queen's Park (Falconer Hall) under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act in accordance with the Statement of Significance (Reasons for Designation) contained in Attachment 5 of the September 2, 2020 report from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, City Planning.

4. If there are no objections to the designations, City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the bills in Council designating the properties under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

5. If there are objections to the designations, City Council direct the City Clerk to refer the designations to the Conservation Review Board.

6. If the designations are referred to the Conservation Review Board, City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate staff to attend any hearing held by the Conservation Review Board in support of Council's decision on the designations of the properties.

Toronto and East York Community Council referred Recommendations 7, 8 and 9 back to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning for a report back until such time as the comprehensive study of the Queen's Park cultural heritage landscape is complete.

Recommendations to be referred:

7. City Council authorize the entering into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) under Section 37 of the Ontario Heritage Act with the owner of 78-90 Queen's Park for the properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park, in a form and with content satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

8. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the necessary bill in Council authorizing the entering into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for the properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park.

9. City Council approve the alterations to the heritage properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park in accordance with Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, to allow for alterations to the heritage properties on the lands known municipally as 80 and 84 Queen's Park with such alterations substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by Architects Alliance, dated March 18, 2020, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated March 18, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, all subject to and in accordance with a Conservation Plan satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, and subject to the following additional conditions:

a. That the related site specific Zoning By-law Amendment giving rise to the proposed alterations has been enacted by City Council and has come into full force and effect in a form and with content acceptable to City Council, as determined by the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning;

b. That prior to the introduction of the bills for such Zoning By-law Amendment by City Council, the owner shall:

1. Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement(s) with the City for the properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park, substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by Architects Alliance, dated March 18, 2020, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated March 18, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., subject to and in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 9.b.2, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

2. Provide detailed Conservation Plan(s) prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment for 80 and 84 Queen's Park, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated March 18, 2020, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

c. That prior to final Site Plan approval, for the development contemplated for 80 and 84 Queen's Park, the owner shall:

1. Provide final site plan drawings substantially in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan(s) required in Recommendation 9.b.2 to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

2. Have obtained final approval for the necessary Zoning By-law Amendment required for the subject property, such Amendment to have come into full force and effect.

3. Provide a Heritage Lighting Plan that describes how the exterior of the heritage properties will be sensitively illuminated to enhance their heritage character to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager Heritage Planning.

4. Provide an Interpretation Plan for the subject properties, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

5. Provide a detailed Landscape Plan for the subject property satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

d. That prior to the issuance of any permit for all or any part of the properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park, including a heritage permit or a building permit, but excluding permits for repairs and maintenance and usual and minor works for the existing heritage building as are acceptable to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, the owner shall:

1. Have obtained final approval for the necessary Zoning By-law Amendment required for the subject property, such Amendment to have come into full force and effect.

2. Provide building permit drawings, including notes and specifications for the conservation and protective measures keyed to the approved Conservation Plan(s) required in Recommendation 9.b.2, including a description of materials and finishes, to be prepared by the project architect and a qualified heritage consultant to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

3. Provide a Letter of Credit, including provision for upwards indexing, in a form and amount and from a bank satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning to secure all work included in the approved Conservation Plan(s), and approved Interpretation Plan.

4. Provide full documentation of the existing heritage properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park, including two (2) printed sets of archival quality 8” x 10” colour photographs with borders in a glossy or semi-gloss finish and one (1) digital set on a CD in tiff format and 600 dpi resolution keyed to a location map, elevations and measured drawings, and copies of all existing interior floor plans and original drawings as may be available, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

e. That prior to the release of the Letter of Credit required in Recommendation 9.d.3, the owner shall:

1. Provide a letter of substantial completion prepared and signed by a qualified heritage consultant confirming that the required conservation work and the required interpretive work has been completed in accordance with the Conservation Plan(s) and Interpretation Plan and that an appropriate standard of conservation has been maintained, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

2. Provide replacement Heritage Easement Agreement photographs to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning.

This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate 80 and 84 Queen's Park under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for these properties.

This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate 80 and 84 Queen's Park under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for these properties.

This report also recommends that City Council approve the proposed alterations for the heritage properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park, in connection with a Zoning Amendment Application by the University of Toronto (UofT) to permit the construction of a new 9-storey institutional building for the University's Centre for Civilizations, Cultures and Cities (“CCC”) at 78-90 Queen's Park. The new building would be situated in the interstitial space between Falconer Hall and the Edward Johnson Building. It would be integrated into the back of Falconer Hall with a link to the Edward Johnson Building.

The conservation strategy for the heritage properties proposes to retain both the Edward Johnson Building at 80 Queen's Park and Falconer Hall at 84 Queen's Park but the McLaughlin Planetarium at 90 Queen's Park would be demolished. The proposed new 43m high building (including mechanical penthouse) would not affect any of the protected views of Queen's Park and it is setback approximately 36 metres from the Queen's Park frontage in order to lessen its visual impact on this important avenue that links Bloor Street to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. The removal of McLaughlin Planetarium allows for improvements to the open space between Falconer Hall and the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) which would enhance the views of its south entrance. In conjunction with the project, there would also be considerable enhancements to the public realm at the Queen's Park frontage and between the buildings.   

This report includes a detailed assessment of the heritage values and attributes of the subject property (see pages 12-30); a description of the proposed development and its impact on the heritage properties on the subject property (see pages 7-9); an analysis of the impact of the proposed changes to the heritage properties on the subject lands and on the adjacent properties in relation to the City's Official Plan policies (pages 31-6) and staff recommendations with respect to this proposal (pages 2-5).

Statements of Significance for the properties recommended for Part IV designation under the Ontario Heritage Act are included in Attachments 4 and 5.

This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate 80 and 84 Queen's Park under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for these properties.

This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate 80 and 84 Queen's Park under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for these properties.

This report also recommends that City Council approve the proposed alterations for the heritage properties at 80 and 84 Queen's Park, in connection with a Zoning Amendment Application by the University of Toronto (UofT) to permit the construction of a new 9-storey institutional building for the University's Centre for Civilizations, Cultures and Cities (“CCC”) at 78-90 Queen's Park. The new building would be situated in the interstitial space between Falconer Hall and the Edward Johnson Building. It would be integrated into the back of Falconer Hall with a link to the Edward Johnson Building.

The conservation strategy for the heritage properties proposes to retain both the Edward Johnson Building at 80 Queen's Park and Falconer Hall at 84 Queen's Park but the McLaughlin Planetarium at 90 Queen's Park would be demolished. The proposed new 43m high building (including mechanical penthouse) would not affect any of the protected views of Queen's Park and it is setback approximately 36 metres from the Queen's Park frontage in order to lessen its visual impact on this important avenue that links Bloor Street to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. The removal of McLaughlin Planetarium allows for improvements to the open space between Falconer Hall and the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) which would enhance the views of its south entrance. In conjunction with the project, there would also be considerable enhancements to the public realm at the Queen's Park frontage and between the buildings.   

This report includes a detailed assessment of the heritage values and attributes of the subject property (see pages 12-30); a description of the proposed development and its impact on the heritage properties on the subject property (see pages 7-9); an analysis of the impact of the proposed changes to the heritage properties on the subject lands and on the adjacent properties in relation to the City's Official Plan policies (pages 31-6) and staff recommendations with respect to this proposal (pages 2-5).

Statements of Significance for the properties recommended for Part IV designation under the Ontario Heritage Act are included in Attachments 4 and 5.
 
Background Information
(September 29, 2020) REVISED Report and Attachments 1-6 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning - Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to Designated Heritage Properties, and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 80 and 84 Queen's Park
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-157083.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Presentation from the Heritage Planner, Heritage Preservation, Urban Design, City Planning - Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to Designated Heritage Properties, and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 80 and 84 Queen's Park
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-157066.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) REVISED Report and Attachments 1-6 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning - Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to Designated Heritage Properties, and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 80 and 84 Queen's Park
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-157079.pdf)
(September 2, 2020) Report and Attachments 1-6 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning - Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to Designated Heritage Properties, and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 80 and 84 Queen's Park
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-156580.pdf)

 
Communications
(September 22, 2020) E-mail from Cynthia Webb (PB.Supp.PB17.4.1)
(September 22, 2020) E-mail from Paul Cravit, Architect, CS & P Architects (PB.Supp.PB17.4.2)
(September 22, 2020) E-mail from Terry Montgomery (PB.Supp.PB17.4.3)
(September 22, 2020) E-mail from John Stewart (PB.Supp.PH17.4.4)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Paul Gooch (PB.Supp.PB17.4.5)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Catherine Lummack (PB.Supp.PB17.4.6)
(September 23, 2020) Letter from Peter Love (PB.Supp.PB17.4.7)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Madeleine Cole (PB.Supp.PB17.4.8)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from David Harrison (PB.Supp.PB17.4.9)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Leigh Taylor Roy (PB.Supp.PB17.4.10)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Paul Cassano (PB.Supp.PB17.4.11)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Yuen Chua and Kian Chua  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.12)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Oliver and Lucie Collins (PB.Supp.PB17.4.13)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Davenport Triangle Residents Association (PB.Supp.PB17.4.14)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Kenneth Bartlett (PB.Supp.PB17.4.15)
(September 23, 2020) Letter from Rina Greer (PB.Supp.PB17.4.16)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Robin Roger (PB.Supp.PB17.4.17)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Afrah Gouda (PB.Supp.PB17.4.18)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Micky Fraterman (PB.Supp.PB17.4.19)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Mike Callaghan (PB.Supp.PB17.4.20)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Judith Dimitriu  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.21)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Martha Batiz (PB.Supp.PB17.4.22)
(September 24, 2020) Letter from J.R. Henderson (PB.Supp.PB17.4.23)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Gillian Bartlett (PB.Supp.PB17.4.24)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Marta Griffiths (PB.Supp.PB17.4.25)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Betty-Ann Heggie (PB.Supp.PB17.4.26)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Beth Sulman (PB.Supp.PB17.4.27)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from W.A. Bogart and Linda Bertoldi (PB.Supp.PB17.4.28)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from Matthew Zambri, President and Kae Eglie, Architectural Conservancy Ontario (PB.Supp.PB17.4.29)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119431.pdf)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Hy Rosenberg (PB.Supp.PB17.4.30)
(September 24, 2020) Letter from William N. Greer (PB.Supp.PB17.4.31)
(September 24, 2020) Letter from Helga Zeinali and Stephan Stamm (PB.Supp.PB17.4.32)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Larry Wayne Richards (PB.Supp.PB17.4.33)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Tom Wright (PB.Supp.PH17.4.34)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Ruth Greisman (PB.Supp.PB17.4.35)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from The Bay Cloverleaf Community Association Executive Team (PB.Supp.PB17.4.36)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119639.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Letter from Leslie Jones (PB.Supp.PB17.4.37)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from Lynne D DiStefano (PB.Supp.PB17.4.38)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Kathryn O’Neill (PB.Supp.PB17.4.39)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from Joseph J. DiStefano (PB.Supp.PB17.4.40)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from David Florkow (PB.Supp.PB17.4.41)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from Vincent Sera (PB.Supp.PB17.4.42)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from Danae Engle, on behalf of the Huron Sussex Residents Organization (PB.Supp.PB17.4.43)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119722.pdf)
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from Tamara and Yakov (Jake) Bukhanov (PB.Supp.PB17.4.44)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Eric Mills (PB.Supp.PB17.4.45)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Fredrick Dean (PB.Supp.PB17.4.46)
(September 26, 2020) Letter from Edward Leman (PB.Supp.PB17.4.47)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Alexander Waugh (PB.Supp.PB17.4.48)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Marilyn Yunis  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.49)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Rita Bilerman, Annex Residents’ Association (PB.Supp.PB17.4.50)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119836.pdf)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Steven and Linda Diener  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.51)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Gitta and Jeff Wyndowe  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.52)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Ron Richer (PB.Supp.PB17.4.53)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Ariella Damelin (PB.Supp.PB17.4.54)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Taanta Gupta (PB.Supp.PB17.4.55)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from David Sisam (PB.Supp.PB17.4.56)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Nicole Stoffman (PB.Supp.PB17.4.57)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Shelley McGirr (PB.Supp.PB17.4.58)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Steven McGirr (PB.Supp.PB17.4.59)
(September 25, 2020) Letter from Sue Dexter, Harbord Village Residents’ Association  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.60)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119992.pdf)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Audrey McKinney and Peter Adamson (PB.Supp.PB17.4.61)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Yaniv Geler (PB.Supp.PB17.4.62)
(September 26, 2020) E-mail from Mary McGee (PB.Supp.PB17.4.63)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Lenore Walters (PB.Supp.PB17.4.64)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Ann Bia  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.65)
(September 26, 2020) Letter from Beate Bowron (PB.Supp.PB17.4.66)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-120085.pdf)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Daphne Dales (PB.Supp.PB17.4.67)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Ronald and Hilary Goldenberg (PB.Supp.PB17.4.68)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Noreen Nisker (PB.Supp.PB17.4.69)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Juleen Marchant (PB.Supp.PB17.4.70)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Brian Greenspan (PB.Supp.PB17.4.71)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Sheldon Gold (PB.Supp.PB17.4.72)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from John Jordan (PB.Supp.PB17.4.73)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Dennis Keefe (PB.Supp.PB17.4.74)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Linda Lewis and Lorie Cappe (PB.Supp.PB17.4.75)
(September 27, 2020) Letter from Lynne D DiStefano (PB.Supp.PB17.4.76)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Bruce Patterson (PB.Supp.PB17.4.77)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Rose Marie Gold (PB.Supp.PB17.4.78)
(September 28, 2020) Letter from Bronwyn Krog (PB.Supp.PB17.4.79)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Bernice Bradt (PB.Supp.PB17.4.80)
(September 27, 2020) Letter from Sol Wassermuhl (PB.Supp.PB17.4.81)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Rosalind Cooper (PB.Supp.PB17.4.82)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Dennis Keefe (PB.Supp.PB17.4.83)
(September 27, 2020) E-mail from Michael Lockhart (PB.Supp.PB17.4.84)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Doreen Teh (PB.Supp.PB17.4.85)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Victoria Lio (PB.Supp.PB17.4.86)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Michael Lockhart (PB.Supp.PB17.4.87)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Minna Kuo (PB.Supp.PB17.4.88)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from The De Meneghi Family (PB.Supp.PB17.4.89)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Wes Khurana (PB.Supp.PB17.4.90)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Andrew Stewart (PB.Supp.PB17.4.91)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Julia Jones (PB.Supp.PB17.4.92)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Mary Jean Potter (PB.Supp.PB17.4.93)
(September 28, 2020) Submission from Andrew Pruss, ERA Architects Inc. - Part 1 of 2 (PB.Supp.PB17.4.94)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-120362.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Submission from Andrew Pruss, ERA Architects Inc. - Part 2 of 2 (PB.Supp.PB17.4.94)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-120364.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Barbara Abramson (PB.Supp.PB17.4.95)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Ron Schmidt (PB.Supp.PB17.4.96)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Rob and Louise Dyer (PB.Supp.PB17.4.97)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Jennifer Babe (PB.Supp.PB17.4.98)
(September 28, 2020) E-mail from Robert and Alexandra Nourse (PB.Supp.PB17.4.99)
(September 24, 2020) Letter from Despina Barnard (PB.Supp.PB17.4.100)
(September 24, 2020) E-mail from Penny Brown (PB.Supp.PB17.4.101)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Michele Weber (PB.Supp.PB17.4.102)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Salim Kanji (PB.Supp.PB17.4.103)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Richard Hegele (PB.Supp.PB17.4.104)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Ron Soskolne (PB.Supp.PB17.4.105)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Patricia Speight (PB.Supp.PB17.4.106)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Frank Potter (PB.Supp.PB17.4.107)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Judith Dimitriu  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.108)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Sue and Peter Sisam (PB.Supp.PB17.4.109)
(September 29, 2020) Letter from Signe Leisk (PB.Supp.PB17.4.110)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-120545.pdf)
(September 24, 2020) Letter from John Ross Henderson (PB.Supp.PB17.4.111)
(September 23, 2020) E-mail from Shanon Grauer (PB.Supp.PB17.4.112)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Heather Manson  (PB.Supp.PB17.4.113)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Iman Mohamed (PB.Supp.PB17.4.114)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Spyros Othonos (PB.Supp.PB17.4.115)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Jodi Cassidy (PB.Supp.PB17.4.116)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Evelyn Kai (PB.Supp.PB17.4.118)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Christine Lee (PB.Supp.PB17.4.117)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Oleg Rosnak (PB.Supp.PB17.4.119)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Joyce Law (PB.Supp.PB17.4.120)
(September 29, 2020) E-mail from Jeanne Erickson (PB.Supp.PB17.4.121)

 
Speakers
Peter Love
Signe Leiske, Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP
Andrew Pruss, ERA Architects
Jon Cummings, Architects Alliance
Louis Tinker, Bousfields Inc
Alan Baker, GYRA - Greater Yorkville Residents' Associations
Lynne DiStefano
Bronwyn Krog
Sue Dexter, Harbord Village Residents’ Association
Phyllis Ortved
Cathie Macdonald, Co-Chair, FoNTRA                

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council approve the alterations to the heritage property at 32 Rowanwood Avenue, in accordance with Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act, with such alterations substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by Cusimano Architect, dated August 11, 2020 and filed with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated May 3, 2019 and revised on August 14, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, all subject to and in accordance with a Conservation Plan satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning, and subject to the following additional conditions:

a. That prior to the final Site Plan Approval for the property at 32 Rowanwood Avenue, the owner shall:

1. Provide a detailed Conservation Plan prepared by a qualified heritage consultant, that is consistent with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment dated May 3, 2019 and revised on August 14, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

2. Provide final site drawings substantially in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 1.a.1. above to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

3. Provide a Letter of Credit, including provision for upwards indexing, in a form and amount and from a bank satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning to secure all work included in the approved Conservation Plan.

b.  That prior to the issuance of any permit for all or any part of the property at  32 Rowanwood Avenue, including a heritage permit or a building permit, but excluding permits for repairs and maintenance and usual and minor works for the existing heritage building as are acceptable to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning the owner shall:

1. Provide building permit drawings, including notes and specifications for the conservation and protective measures keyed to the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 1.a.1. above including a description of materials and finishes, to be prepared by the project architect and a qualified heritage consultant to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

c. That prior to the release of the Letter of Credit, as required in Recommendation 1.a.3. above the owner shall:

1. Provide a letter of substantial completion prepared and signed by a qualified heritage consultant confirming that the required conservation work has been completed in accordance with the Conservation Plan standard of conservation has been maintained, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

This report recommends that City Council approve the proposed alterations to the heritage building, known as the Rosecourt Apartments, at 32 Rowanwood Avenue under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act. This building was constructed in 1912-1913 and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act as part of the South Rosedale Heritage Conservation District (SRHCD). It is noted as a Category "C" building within SRHCD Study. Category "C" buildings have "contextual significance, which contribute to the heritage character of South Rosedale…" Prior to refurbishment works commencing on site this building contained nine rental apartment units.

The proposal involves extensive alterations and a roof addition to increase the usable floor space within the building and add five new rental residential units. The alterations include: a fourth-storey addition; replacement of windows to match original windows; alterations to some original openings; introduction of new openings facing Rowanwood Avenue and the replacement of existing balconies and railings facing Rowanwood Avenue.

Heritage Planning has worked with the applicant to ensure that the proposed alterations meet the general intent of the SRHCD Study's guidelines and will not have a negative impact on the existing heritage building and existing context within the SRHCD. The applicant still needs to apply for approval under the Planning Act (minor variance and site plan approval) and therefore this application relates solely to the approval that is required under the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act. Future planning applications will be assessed against approvals under the Act and conditions will be secured as appropriate.

This report recommends that City Council approve the proposed alterations to the heritage building, known as the Rosecourt Apartments, at 32 Rowanwood Avenue under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act. This building was constructed in 1912-1913 and is designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act as part of the South Rosedale Heritage Conservation District (SRHCD). It is noted as a Category "C" building within SRHCD Study. Category "C" buildings have "contextual significance, which contribute to the heritage character of South Rosedale…" Prior to refurbishment works commencing on site this building contained nine rental apartment units.

The proposal involves extensive alterations and a roof addition to increase the usable floor space within the building and add five new rental residential units. The alterations include: a fourth-storey addition; replacement of windows to match original windows; alterations to some original openings; introduction of new openings facing Rowanwood Avenue and the replacement of existing balconies and railings facing Rowanwood Avenue.

Heritage Planning has worked with the applicant to ensure that the proposed alterations meet the general intent of the SRHCD Study's guidelines and will not have a negative impact on the existing heritage building and existing context within the SRHCD. The applicant still needs to apply for approval under the Planning Act (minor variance and site plan approval) and therefore this application relates solely to the approval that is required under the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act. Future planning applications will be assessed against approvals under the Act and conditions will be secured as appropriate.
 
Background Information
(September 4, 2020) Report and Attachments 1-3 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning - Alterations to a Property Designated Under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act - 32 Rowanwood Avenue
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-156579.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Presentation from the Heritage Planner, Heritage Preservation, Urban Design, City Planning - Alterations to a Property Designated Under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act -32 Rowanwood Avenue
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-157063.pdf)

 
Communications
(September 25, 2020) Submission from Philip Evans, ERA Architects (PB.Supp.PB17.1.1)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119467.pdf)

 
Speakers
Philip Evans, ERA Architects
Daniel Cusimano, Cusimano Architect Incorporated
Matthew Ruggieri

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:  

1. City Council include the property at 2106 Yonge Street on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register.

2. City Council state its intention to designate the properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act in accordance with the Statements of Significance (Reasons for Designation)(Attachments 4 and 5) attached to the report (July 15, 2020) from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

3. If there are no objections to the designations, City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the bills in Council designating the properties under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

4. If there are objections to the designations, City Council direct the City Clerk to refer the designations to the Conservation Review Board.

5. If the designations are referred to the Conservation Review Board, City Council authorize the City Solicitor and appropriate staff to attend any hearing held by the Conservation Review Board in support of Council's decision on the designations of the properties.

6. City Council authorize the entering into of Heritage Easement Agreement(s) under Section 37 of the Ontario Heritage Act with the owner of 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street in a form and content satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

7. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to introduce the necessary bill in Council authorizing the entering into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for the properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street.

8. City Council approve the alterations to the heritage properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street in accordance with Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, to allow for alterations to the heritage properties on the lands known municipally as 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, with such alterations substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by RAW Design, dated April 13, 2020, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated April 6, 2018 with the HIA Addendum, dated April 24, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning all subject to and in accordance with a Conservation Plan satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and subject to the following additional conditions:

a. That the related site specific Zoning By-law Amendment giving rise to the proposed alterations has been enacted by City Council and has come into full force and effect in a form and with content acceptable to City Council, as determined by the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

b. That prior to the introduction of the bills for such Zoning By-law Amendment by City Council, the owner shall:

1. Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement with the City for the properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, substantially in accordance with plans and drawings prepared by RAW Design, dated April 13, 2020, and on file with the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA), dated April 6, 2018 with the HIA Addendum, dated April 24, 2020, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., subject to and in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 8.b.2. below, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning including execution of such agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.

2. Provide a detailed Conservation Plan prepared by a qualified heritage consultant that is substantially in accordance with the conservation strategy set out in the Heritage Impact Assessment and HIA Addendum for 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated April 6, 2018 and April 24, 2020 respectively, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

c. That prior to final Site Plan approval, for the development contemplated for 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, the owner shall:

1. Provide final site plan drawings substantially in accordance with the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 8.b.2. above to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

2. Have obtained final approval for the necessary Zoning By-law Amendment required for the subject property, such Amendment to have come into full force and effect.

3. Provide a Heritage Lighting Plan that describes how the exterior of the heritage properties will be sensitively illuminated to enhance their heritage character to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

4. Provide an Interpretation Plan for the subject properties, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning and thereafter shall implement such Plan to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

5. Provide a detailed Landscape Plan for the subject property satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

6. Provide a Signage Plan for the subject property to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

d. That prior to the issuance of any permit for all or any part of the properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, including a heritage permit or a building permit, but excluding permits for repairs and maintenance and usual and minor works for the existing heritage building as are acceptable to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning the owner shall:

1. Have obtained final approval for the necessary Zoning By-law Amendment required for the subject property, such Amendment to have come into full force and effect.

2. Provide building permit drawings, including notes and specifications for the conservation and protective measures keyed to the approved Conservation Plan required in Recommendation 8.b.2. above including a description of materials and finishes, to be prepared by the project architect and a qualified heritage consultant to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

3. Provide a Letter of Credit, including provision for upwards indexing, in a form and amount and from a bank satisfactory to the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning to secure all work included in the approved Conservation Plan, and approved Interpretation Plan.

4. Provide full documentation of the existing heritage properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street, including two (2) printed sets of archival quality 8” x 10” colour photographs with borders in a glossy or semi-gloss finish and one (1) digital set on a CD in tiff format and 600 dpi resolution keyed to a location map, elevations and measured drawings, and copies of all existing interior floor plans and original drawings as may be available, to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

e. That prior to the release of the Letter of Credit required in Recommendation 8.d.3. above the owner shall:

1. Provide a letter of substantial completion prepared and signed by a qualified heritage consultant confirming that the required conservation work and the required interpretive work has been completed in accordance with the Conservation Plan and Interpretation Plan and that an appropriate standard of conservation has been maintained, all to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

2. Provide replacement Heritage Easement Agreement photographs to the satisfaction of the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning.

The properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street are located on the west side of Yonge Street between Manor Road West and Hillsdale Avenue West. They are comprised of two large two-storey commercial buildings with glazed storefronts in the first-storey and apartments in the second-storey. The property at 2100 Yonge Street (8 and 12 Manor Road and 2102 and 2104 Yonge Street) was constructed in 1936-1937 and was designed by the architect Benjamin Brown (1890-1974) with the property at 2106 Yonge Street (2108 and 2110 Yonge Street) being built shorty after in 1937-1938. The architect of the latter is unknown.

This report recommends that City Council approve the proposed alterations for the heritage properties at 2100 Yonge Street and 2106 Yonge Street, in connection with a Zoning Amendment Application proposing a 12-storey redevelopment of the site that will contain retail uses at grade with 91 residential units at floors above. This report also recommends that City Council state its intention to designate 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for these properties.

The conservation strategy for the heritage properties would retain in situ the Yonge Street facades of the properties as well as retaining the interior of the buildings along this frontage to a depth of three metres (approximately 10 feet).  At the Manor Road West frontage, the project retains in situ the 13 metres of the south facade of the property.

The properties at 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street are located on the west side of Yonge Street between Manor Road West and Hillsdale Avenue West. They are comprised of two large two-storey commercial buildings with glazed storefronts in the first-storey and apartments in the second-storey. The property at 2100 Yonge Street (8 and 12 Manor Road and 2102 and 2104 Yonge Street) was constructed in 1936-1937 and was designed by the architect Benjamin Brown (1890-1974) with the property at 2106 Yonge Street (2108 and 2110 Yonge Street) being built shorty after in 1937-1938. The architect of the latter is unknown.

This report recommends that City Council approve the proposed alterations for the heritage properties at 2100 Yonge Street and 2106 Yonge Street, in connection with a Zoning Amendment Application proposing a 12-storey redevelopment of the site that will contain retail uses at grade with 91 residential units at floors above. This report also recommends that City Council state its intention to designate 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act and give authority to enter into Heritage Easement Agreement(s) for these properties.

The conservation strategy for the heritage properties would retain in situ the Yonge Street facades of the properties as well as retaining the interior of the buildings along this frontage to a depth of three metres (approximately 10 feet).  At the Manor Road West frontage, the project retains in situ the 13 metres of the south facade of the property.  
 
Background Information
(September 8, 2020) Report and Attachments 1-6 from the Senior Manager, Heritage Planning, Urban Design, City Planning - Inclusion on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register, Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to Designated Heritage Properties, and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-156581.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Presentation from the Heritage Planner, Heritage Preservation, Urban Design, City Planning - Inclusion on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register, Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Alterations to Designated Heritage Properties, and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 2100 and 2106 Yonge Street

 
Communications
(September 25, 2020) E-mail from David McMahon (PB.Supp.PB17.5.1)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-119430.pdf)
(September 28, 2020) Submission from Julie Tyndorf, ERA Architects Inc. (PB.Supp.PB17.5.2)
(September 29, 2020) Letter from Sharon Mourer, Chair Heritage Committee, SERRA (PB.Supp.PB17.5.3)
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2020/pb/comm/communicationfile-120382.pdf)

 
Speakers
Kathryn Randle, Rockport Group
Julie Tyndorf, ERA Architects Inc. (Submission Filed)                

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 2688 Dundas Street West.

The purpose of this staff report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 2688 Dundas Street West.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 1540 Bloor Street West.

The purpose of this staff report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 1540 Bloor Street West.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 19 Dorval Road.

The purpose of this staff report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 19 Dorval Road.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 299 Rogers Road.

The purpose of this staff report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 299 Rogers Road.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council deny the application for the proposed Clothing Drop Box Location permit at 3466 Dundas Street West.

The purpose of this staff report is to report on the refusal to issue a permit by Municipal Licensing and Standards in the matter of an application for a Clothing Drop Box permit located at 3466 Dundas Street West.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the installation of an on-street accessible parking space at the location identified in Appendix A attached to the report (September 17, 2020) from the Acting Director, Traffic Management, Transportation Services.

The purpose of this report is to obtain authorization for the installation of on-street accessible parking space for persons with disabilities.

As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates transit service on the subject street, City Council approval of this report is required.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:  

1. City Council approve the amendment to Schedule B of City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 925, Permit Parking, to incorporate a revised map of permit parking area "6G", as attached in Appendix A of the report (September 9, 2020) from the Manager, Permits and Enforcement – Parking and Administration, Transportation Services.

Transportation Services is requesting approval from City Council to prohibit the General Manager from accepting applications from residents of, visitors to, and tradespersons at the development properties municipally known as 225 Jarvis Street from residential on-street permit parking.  

Transportation Services has assessed the realignment of permit parking area 6G and the exclusion of the development property located at 225 Jarvis Street as requested by Toronto and East York Community Council, Item TE16.71, on July 16, 2020.

Transportation Services is recommending approval of the exclusion as it will not impact negatively on Jarvis Street and neighbouring residents.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council authorize the amendments to parking regulations on Wellington Street East, between Yonge Street and Church Street, as described in Attachment 1: Parking Amendments - Wellington Street East attached to the Letter (October 14, 2020) from Councillor Wong-Tam.

At its December 13, 2016 meeting, City Council adopted Item TE20.44 entitled "Road Alterations - Wellington Street East, Church Street, and Front Street Intersection" and approved parking amendments on the north side of Wellington Street East, between Yonge Street and Church Street, as part of the Wellington Street Revitalization project. This streetscape project has unfortunately seen multiple delays but is planned to begin in 2021.

At its November 7, 2017 meeting, City Council adopted Item TE27.97 entitled "Parking Regulations - Wellington Street East" and approved the temporary amendments to parking regulations until as such time as the proposed streetscape improvements are completed, on the north side of Wellington Street East, between Yonge Street and Church Street, in order to allow parking machines operating during the utility work before the construction of streetscape improvements. The intent was to allow for some revenue to be generated while the utility work was proceeding. The parking meters and signage were later removed by Toronto Hydro and not reinstated.  As a result there is no clarity on the regulations and no means to enforce the temporary parking amendments.

Transportation Services has received a request from St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood Business Improvement Area (BIA) to reinstate the parking regulations on the north side of this section of Wellington Street East between Yonge Street and Church Street as previously passed by Council in 2016. In an effort to support Wellington Street East restaurants who have been hit with the dual disruptions of utility work and a pandemic, the BIA received permission to “paint out” the future streetscape on the north side that was approved by City Council. This has allowed for both the extension of CafeTO patios as well as providing wider pedestrian space to physically distance, create some colourful whimsy as well as helping improve intersection safety concerns at the Church Street intersection.

With the utility work set to be completed this year and streetscape construction occurring next year, reverting the parking regulations would allow the St. Lawrence Market Neighbourhood BIA’s work to remain unimpeded by traffic and help normalize the future operation of Wellington Street East.

As the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) operates a transit service on Wellington Street East, City Council approval of this report is required.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1.  City Council exempt the implementation of Permit Parking on Coxwell Avenue, between Eastwood Drive and Dundas Street East from the requirements of subsection 925-4B of City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 925, Permit Parking, until such time as Toronto and East York Community Council considers a request for implementation of Permit Parking at this location.

I have heard from constituents of Coxwell Avenue from Eastwood Road and Dundas Street East who are experiencing difficulty parking outside of their homes overnight. I am requesting to implement legal on-street permit parking in this area by expanding the existing 9C zone to include the above noted section of Coxwell Avenue. Implementing this change would allow residents in the area to apply for a permit parking sticker and park legally overnight.

The proposed change will not affect daytime stopping conditions along the east side of the street. While permit holders will be able to park beyond the 1HR currently in place for 9:00am-4:00pm on weekdays, the No Stopping during the 4:00-6:00pm rush hour will remain the same. This update will also allow all 9C permit holders to access the proposed parking spots overnight.

Due to ongoing COVID-19 response, the City’s Polling Unit continues to experience delays and a significant backlog. This motion exempts the implementation from the polling requirement based on outreach that has been conducted with residents on the street.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council request the Director, Urban Forestry to report to Toronto and East York Community Council on any tree removal applications by Metrolinx in Wards 14 and 19, before any approvals are granted.

2. City Council request Transportation Services to report to Toronto and East York Community Council on any Right of Way Occupation, Park Occupation, or other permit applications by Metrolinx in Wards 14 and 19, before any approvals are granted.

Recently community members were told that Metrolinx has applied for permits for different types of work on City land. However residents have been unable to get additional details from Metrolinx. This has caused concern in the community as there have been other instances where the community has been surprised by Metrolinx work in the local neighbourhood. City Staff identified this issue in TE 13.27 Metrolinx Ontario Line - Right-of-way Permit Process and Requirements. I have heard from residents who are asking to be kept in the loop.

I am hoping that you support my motion to ensure that the community is properly consulted. I believe this process is the only way to ensure that residents in Toronto – Danforth can be sure that they are fully informed about work in City Parks, on City Right of Way's or that otherwise impacts City resources

The Interim City Clerk recommends that:

1. City Council adopt one of the following options to fill the vacancy:

Option A – Appointment

A. City Council fill the vacancy by appointing a person qualified to hold office in the City of Toronto at a special meeting to be held on Friday, November 20, 2020 at 9:30 a.m., in accordance with the following:

1. The City Clerk shall advertise the vacancy inviting any interested and qualified applicants to seek appointment to City Council;

2. Interested persons shall complete a Consent of Nominee and Declaration of Qualification and provide personal identification showing their name and qualifying address within the City of Toronto;

3. The deadline for submitting the required forms to the City Clerk shall be Friday, November 13 at 4:30 p.m.;

4. The City Clerk shall submit a report with the list of applicants for publication on the agenda of the November 20 City Council meeting;

5. Each applicant shall be provided the opportunity to address City Council for up to 5 minutes;

6. The order in which applicants address City Council shall be determined by lot drawn by the City Clerk when City Council begins its debate on the item;

7. Members of City Council shall be entitled to ask one question of each candidate;

8. City Council shall vote on the appointment by ballot in accordance with procedures to be determined by the City Clerk; and

9. City Council shall enact a by-law confirming the appointment of the successful candidate to the office for the remainder of the term of the present Council.

OR

Option B – By-election

B. Require that a by-election be held to fill the vacancy in Ward 22 – Scarborough Agincourt, as outlined in the draft bill in Appendix "A"; and

1. Authorize a contribution rebate program for payment of rebates to persons who make contributions to candidates in the by-election as outlined in the draft bill in Appendix "B".

2. Direct the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer to increase the City Clerk's Office 2021 Operating Budget by $550,000 gross and $0 net to reflect the funds required to conduct the by-election, and to increase the City's 2021 Contribution Rebate budget in Non-Program by $150,000 gross and $0 net through the 2021 Budget Process to administer the contribution rebate program related to a by-election to fill the vacancy in Ward 22, both fully funded from the Election Reserve.

At its September 30, October 1 and 2 meeting, City Council declared a vacancy in the office of Councillor, Ward 22 - Scarborough Agincourt, and deferred the decision as to whether to fill the vacancy by appointment or by-election.

The City of Toronto Act, 2006 provides that Council, within 60 days after the day the office is declared vacant, either fill the vacancy by appointing a person or pass a by-law requiring that a by-election be held to fill the vacancy. The 60-day clock started with the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on September 24.

The Deputy City Manager, Community and Social Services, and the Deputy City Manager, Corporate Services, recommend that:

1. City Council receive this report for information.

At its meeting on September 30, 2020, City Council directed staff to clarify the manner in which local Councillors are informed of (i) proposed acquisitions or leases of shelter sites prior to the execution of any related transactional documents, and (ii) the nature of the information that is provided; and to recommend a process to reflect such engagement and capture any commentary provided by the local Councillor that can be reflected in the public reporting process.

Shelter, Support and Housing Administration is undertaking a comprehensive review of the engagement process required in connection with the siting of new shelter and service delivery sites. To ensure sufficient due diligence with respect to any recommended changes, staff will report back to City Council in the spring of 2021.

The City Solicitor recommends that:

1.  City Council adopt the Recommendations contained in Confidential Attachment 1 to this report.

2.  If the confidential instructions in Confidential Attachment 1 are adopted, City Council authorize the public release of:

a.  the recommendations contained in the Confidential Attachment 1, with the remainder of the Confidential Attachment 1 to remain confidential, as it contains advice subject to solicitor-client privilege; and

b.  Confidential Appendices A and B.

The purpose of this report is to seek further instructions respecting the appeal of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for 161 and 167 Parliament Street, 351, 363, 371 and 373 Queen Street East and 80, 90, 92 and 94 Power Street, currently before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the "LPAT"). A ten-day LPAT hearing is scheduled to commence on January 25, 2021.

This report has been prepared in consultation with City Planning.

The City Solicitor recommends that:

1. City Council adopt the recommendations contained in the Confidential Attachment 1 to the Report (October 19, 2020) from the City Solicitor.

2. City Council authorize the public release of the confidential recommendations in Confidential Attachment 1 to the Report (October 19, 2020) from the City Solicitor, if adopted by City Council.

3. City Council direct that all other information contained in Confidential Attachment 1 to the Report (October 19, 2020) from the City Solicitor is to remain confidential at the discretion of the City Solicitor, as it contains advice and information which is subject to solicitor-client privilege.

CAPREIT Inc. (the "Applicant"), the owner of the property at 141 Davisville Avenue (the "Site"), has appealed its Zoning By-law Amendment application to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (the "LPAT"), due to City Council's failure to make a decision on the application within the time prescribed by the Planning Act.

The application under appeal proposes to construct a 16-storey rental apartment building containing 143 dwelling units and one guest suite (the "Appealed Application").  The proposed building would be located on the northern portion of the Site fronting onto Davisville Avenue.  The southern portion of the Site fronting onto Balliol Street currently contains a 20-storey rental apartment building with 313 dwelling units, which is proposed to be retained.  

The LPAT held a first pre-hearing conference on this matter on November 21, 2018, a second pre-hearing conference on April 30, 2019, a third pre-hearing conference on February 4, 2020 and a fourth pre-hearing conference on July 31, 2020.

Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, seconded by Councillor Paul Ainslie, recommends that: 

1. City Council request the City Manager to consider, as part of his upcoming October 2020 COVID-19 Financial report, the reduction of taxicab licensing renewal fees for 2020.
 

2. City Council request the General Government and Licensing Committee, at its November meeting, to consider an amendment to Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 546, Licensing of Vehicles-for-Hire to extend the maximum age of vehicles used as a taxicab, sedan limousine or private transportation company vehicle from seven model years to nine model years, for vehicles of the 2013 model year and onward, and the maximum age of vehicles used as a stretch limousine from eight model years to ten model years, for vehicles of the 2012 model year and onward.

Toronto’s Taxicab industry has been experiencing economic hardship for over a decade, which has only been accelerated and exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the pandemic, the industry has lost over 90 percent of their business, with approximately 95 percent of the fleet having been parked or without service since the state of emergency began. As Toronto continues its cautious reopening, the Taxicab owners estimate it will take the Taxicab industry an additional 12-18 months to fully recover at full service levels and revenues.

For the Taxicab industry to survive, they need immediate financial relief and assistance from the City of Toronto. Despite access to the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), many taxi owners have indicated that they will be unable to pay the existing taxi renewal fees, and are concerned about their ability to replace their fleet when they reach the end of their current viability cycle.

In keeping these factors in mind, we are requesting that the City Council to consider the following recommendations and provide immediate relief to taxi operators across the City of Toronto.

Councillor Anthony Perruzza, seconded by Councillor James Pasternak, recommend that:

1. City Council continue to rescind the existing southbound through traffic prohibition in effect at all times at the intersection of Finch Avenue West at York Gate Boulevard / Elana Drive, from November 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021.

2. City Council continue to prohibit the westbound left-turn movement at the intersection of Finch Avenue West at York Gate Boulevard / Elana Drive, from November 1, 2020 to May 31, 2021.

3. City Council request the Director, Transportation Planning and Capital Program to report to the May 2021 Etobicoke York Community Council meeting on the impacts of the temporary removal of the southbound through traffic prohibition and the temporary removal of the westbound left-turn movement at the intersection of Finch Avenue West at York Gate Boulevard / Elana Drive.

This Motion seeks to re-open and amend the City Council decision on Item EY16.12 from its meeting of July 28 and 29, 2020.

This Motion seeks approval for a time extension of temporary traffic regulations currently in effect at the intersection of Finch Avenue West at York Gate Boulevard / Elana Drive. These temporary traffic regulations include restriction of the westbound left-turn movement and provision of the southbound through traffic movement.

The time extension being requested is from November 1 to May 31, 2021.

REQUIRES RE-OPENING

Item EY16.12 - (July 28 and 29, 2020 City Council meeting.)

Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, seconded by Councillor Michael Thompson, recommends that City Council adopt the following recommendation in the report (October 21, 2020) from the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management:

1. City Council authorize the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to negotiate and enter into an agreement with Inabuggy Incorporated to permit the use of the City's official marks relating to St. Lawrence Market and the operation of an online grocery shopping and delivery service for St. Lawrence Market, at no cost to the City, on terms acceptable to the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.

To better serve residents of Toronto and City of Toronto tenants at the St. Lawrence Market, the Corporate Real Estate Management Division is seeking to enter into an agreement with grocery delivery service provider, Inabuggy Incorporated ("Inabuggy"), to provide an online ordering and delivery service for the Market.

The agreement would allow Inabuggy to use the City of Toronto's official marks relating to St. Lawrence Market in an online store. St. Lawrence Market management would receive sales data from online purchases such as volume, audience and other general trends to help inform future improvements for the Market.

- St. Lawrence Market management has researched and conducted competitive analysis of other service providers to reach the selection of Inabuggy.

- The service is required urgently to provide small business support for tenants affected negatively by COVID-19 prior to the cold winter weather when customers will be less likely to visit the Market in person and COVID-19 second wave could increase case numbers.

- The service has no cost to the City of Toronto or St. Lawrence Market tenants. There is no financial impact to the City.

- Permission of the City is required for Inabuggy to use the St. Lawrence Market logo and name in the online store.

 
This service is required urgently as a result of sales and sales trend impacts of COVID-19 and negative effects on the business of St. Lawrence Market tenants. The service will help the City and St. Lawrence Market provide an enhanced customer experience to customers with better access to Market products through alternative shopping methods.

Councillor Paul Ainslie, seconded by Councillor Gary Crawford, recommends that:

1. City Council direct the City Solicitor and any other appropriate City staff to attend the Toronto Local Appeal Body hearing in respect of 3655 Kingston Road (File 20 205956 S45 24 TLAB) to support the Committee of Adjustment's refusal of the applicant’s proposed development (Application A0189/20SC) and oppose the appeal.

2. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to retain outside consultants as necessary.

3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to negotiate, if necessary, a resolution of the appeal and, if a resolution is reached to settle the appeal at the City Solicitor’s discretion, and in consultation with the Ward Councillor and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning.

On September 23, 2020, the Scarborough District Panel of the Committee of Adjustment refused an Application related to the property municipally known as 3655 Kingston Road (the “Subject Property”) for minor variances to permit additional variances for the 9 storey apartment building. The Application was filed as Application A0189/20SC. The Applicant has appealed the refusal decision to the Toronto Local Appeal Body (20 205956 S45 24 TLAB).

Minor variances were refused to allow the proposed number of dwelling units of 106, whereas the maximum permitted number of dwelling units is 99 and the proposed vertical clearance of 1.98 metres for parking spaces T78 and T79, whereas parking spaces must have minimum vertical clearance of 2 metres.

A previous Committee of Adjustment application (A0035/19SC) permitted variances for lot coverage and floor area.

The development was the subject of a combined Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment application (File 15 245019 ESC 36 OZ). On October 4, 2017, City Council approved the application and adopted amendments to the Scarborough Village Community Zoning By-law 10010 and the Toronto Zoning By-law 569-2013 to permit the development. The proposed building setbacks, height and the entire building envelope have not changed since City Council passed the Zoning By-law amendments.

The decision of the Committee of Adjustment, Scarborough District recommended refusal of the application as the applications did not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan or Zoning By-law and the requested variance was not minor nor considered desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

1.  City Council request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, in consultation with the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture and the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild, to report to the Planning and Housing Committee in the second quarter of 2021 on an approach to a potential retail strategy that:

a.  ensures new retail uses better address the goals and objectives of the Official Plan;

b.  evaluates similar policies in other cities, including, but not limited to, the 2006 Formula Retail Strategy in San Francisco; and

c.  promotes flexibility and incentivizes variation in both the size and type of new retail spaces on commercial main streets.

On March 28, 2017, City Council adopted MM27.36, “Creating a Chain Store Retail Strategy for Toronto.” This Motion is follow-up on that request to City staff as they have yet to report back.

Small businesses are the lifeblood of our neighbourhoods. Prior to the pandemic, there was concern that the character and vibrancy of many communities was changing as long-time establishments, including small grocery and hardware stores, independent cafes and other unique neighbourhood establishments were being pushed out for larger chain retail establishments. Restrictions and physical distancing caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic is financially threatening many of the remaining small businesses, and nervous landlords may be likely to turn to chain retail to fill new vacancies as they may be seen as more stable tenants.

As per the March 28, 2017 Motion, a formula retail strategy, “would be based on determining the locational appropriateness for the use, and to ensure that any new formula retail compliments the existing aesthetic character of a neighbourhood. The purpose of the strategy is not to stop new formula retail, but instead to direct it in a manner that both serves the day to day needs of communities, and is in keeping with the character of the streetscape.”

At the October 20, 2020 Planning and Housing Committee, a new Retail Design Manual was recommended for adoption by the committee and is before City Council at its October 27 and 28 meeting. While the great work that staff have done to help shape the form and function of retail spaces in the City is notable, the new Retail Design Manual does not respond to the March 28 2017 request from City Council, which remains outstanding.

While COVID-19 will have long-term impacts on our communities, having a chain retail strategy in place may assist in ensuring our neighbourhoods recover and rebuild into vital and vibrant neighbourhoods.

Councillor Paula Fletcher, seconded by Councillor Brad Bradford recommends that:

1.  City Council direct the Executive Director, Corporate Real Estate Management, to engage with community sailing clubs and explore the opportunity to amend the existing lease agreements from a fully net to a semi-gross lease and report back to the General Government and Licensing Committee by the second quarter of 2021 on the results of that engagement.

The various leases for boating facilities across the waterfront help to provide an expanded range of affordable recreation opportunities on the water at no cost to the City. Currently, the boating facilities under lease with the Parks, Forestry and Recreation Division range from small community sailing clubs to long established clubs with significant permanent facilities. The clubs are all not-for-profit corporations. These facilities have helped to meet demand for sailing in a social context and are consistent with the desire of the City to provide diverse, locally responsive recreation opportunities.

Over the years, many of these clubs have faced ongoing challenges, specifically as it relates to significant increases in their property tax assessments and corresponding increases in property tax, of which, they are fully responsible for as per the terms of their agreements with the City.  These increases have ultimately been resolved through the property assessment appeal process – many of these appeals are filed and administered by staff at the City of Toronto, a process that is administratively onerous on both the City and its community sailing club tenants.  While these assessment appeals are being considered, these clubs can face property tax obligations that are difficult to meet and puts them at risk of default to the City of Toronto until such time as the tax appeals are resolved and the taxes are adjusted accordingly.

As a way to mitigate against these significant fluctuations in property taxes from one year to another, consideration should be given to amend the existing leases with the boat clubs to explore options around moving from fully net leases which are currently in place, to semi-gross leases.  A semi-gross lease would see the boat clubs pay a regularized annual amount in basic rent and property taxes which would increase annually by a prescribed amount, allowing these community sailing clubs to easily forecast and cash-flow allowing them to mitigate against any potential defaults of their leases.  Additionally, this allows City staff to ultimately deal directly with the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and not have to involve any of the clubs in negotiated settlements of property assessments.

Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, seconded by Councillor Shelley Carroll, recommends that:

1. City Council increase the Approved 2020 Operating Budget for Heritage Toronto on a one-time basis by $7,500.00 gross, $0 net, fully funded by Section 37 community benefits obtained from the development at 65-77 King Street East and 46 Colborne Street (Source Account: XR3026-3701019), for the production and installation of a heritage plaque at 10 Court Street (Cost Centre HG0001).

This Motion seeks authorization to release $7,500 in Section 37 funds to Heritage Toronto for a heritage plaque to commemorate the history of 10 Court Street for being the location of Toronto’s first organized ambulance service.

Toronto’s first organized ambulance service was established in 1832 during the City’s first cholera epidemic. Carters transported the sick and dead between places of medical care and burial grounds at great personal risk of infection. Toronto’s first Mayor and leader of the 1837 Upper Canada Rebellion, William Lyon Mackenzie, may have worked as a carter during this time.

Over the next decades, the task of moving the seriously ill or injured to hospitals was carried out by a mix of private and public services. Starting in 1888, the new Toronto Police Ambulance Service, based at Police Headquarters at 10 Court Street, began to handle emergency medical runs. The police division operated four horse-drawn ambulances and the officers received basic medical training from St. John Ambulance.

In the 1930s, the ambulance services became the responsibility of the Department of Public Health, and the Police no longer provided ambulance services. Despite improvements, the City’s emergency medical system was divided into small jurisdictions and lacked a central dispatch centre, resulting in delays responding to calls.

From the 1950s to the 1970s, Toronto’s ambulance services were improved, reorganized, and amalgamated. In February 1975, Toronto’s last remaining private ambulance services were merged with public services to create the modern Toronto EMS. With the opening of the Toronto Ambulance Headquarters, located at 4330 Dufferin Street, in 1981, and the introduction of 911 service to Toronto in 1982, the City’s emergency medical services became recognizable as the modern system in place today.

Since then, the introduction of portable defibrillators and improvements to emergency medical care have drastically improved outcomes for people who need urgent transportation to hospital.

As Heritage Toronto is a directly funded City agency and not an "outside party", no undertaking is required to be signed by Heritage Toronto to govern the use of the funds and financial reporting.

Councillor Mike Layton, seconded by Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam recommends that:

1.  City Council increase the Approved 2020 Operating Budget for Heritage Toronto by $7,500.00 gross, $0 net, fully funded by Section 37 community benefits obtained from the development at 1 and 3 Sultan Street, 11 St Thomas Street, and 76-98 Charles Street West (Source Account XR3026-3700004), for the production and installation of a Heritage Plaque commemorating the Underground Railroad restaurant (Cost Centre: HG0001).

This Motion seeks to release $7,500 in Section 37 funds to Heritage Toronto for a heritage plaque commemorating the Underground Railroad soul food restaurant.  The plaque is proposed to be installed at 406 Bloor Street East. 

The Underground Railroad soul food restaurant opened at 406 Bloor Street East in 1969. It was one of the City’s first major restaurants to serve southern comfort food and became a hot spot for Toronto's increasingly visible Black culture and visiting dignitaries and celebrities. The business was a joint venture between football players John Henry Jackson and Dave Mann (both American players for the Toronto Argonauts) and Torontonians Howard Matthews (whose wife was Broadway star and jazz and blues singer Salome Bey), and celebrated jazz drummer Archie Alleyne.

The menu was a mix of soul food and Cajun, Creole, and West Indian dishes, such as fish gumbo, cornbread, southern fried chicken, hushpuppies, candied yams, and collard greens. The Underground Railroad was a major success and was popular with Torontonians, tourists, and celebrities alike: Harry Belafonte, Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis, Mick Jagger, Bob Dylan, Isaac Hayes, B.B. King, Stevie Wonder, Robert Plant, Peter O’Toole, Lee Majors, O.J. Simpson, Magic Johnson, Sugar Ray Leonard, and Bishop Desmond Tutu all ate there, and many had their photos framed on the wall.

The restaurant moved from its Bloor Street location to 225 King Street East in April 1973 and remained popular. At Christmas, the owners would serve turkey dinners to those in need and supported Black youth, as well as Caribana during its early years. The Underground Railroad was forced to close in August 1988 and briefly re-opened on Church Street before shutting down permanently in August 1990.

The enacting By-law 1089-2002 for the development at 1 and 3 Sultan Street, 11 St Thomas Street, and 76-98 Charles Street West allocates Section 37 funding for the Toronto Heritage Grant Program. As Heritage Toronto is a directly funded City agency and not considered an "outside party", no undertaking is required to be signed by Heritage Toronto governing the use of the funds and financial reporting.

As the second location of the Restaurant, at 225 King Street East, is in Councillor Wong-Tam’s Ward, a similar Motion recognizing that location is included in a separate Motion on the agenda.

Councillor Mike Layton, seconded by Councillor Joe Cressy, recommends that:

1. City Council request the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation to work toward the installation of a skate spot in alignment with the City's Skateboard Strategy in an area in Christie Pits to be jointly identified by the General Manager, Parks, Forestry and Recreation and the local Councillor's office.

  
2.  City Council request that the work in Part 1 above be completed before the end of the second quarter of 2021.

Since the summer of 2018, residents have installed a do-it-yourself skate park within the Sid Smith Rink in Christie Pits.

The success of this skate park has been immense. People of all ages and ability flock to the rink to participate in their favourite recreational activity and spend time with friends and others. The rink has also become the go-to place for women and youth because they feel safest within this space.

Unfortunately, the popularity of the rink is causing disruptions with local residents as their houses are subjected to the noise of skateboards hitting concrete for almost 12 hours a day. Parks Operations staff, my office, those involved in the Christie Pits DIY skate park, and local residents have been meeting for the last three months to try and get a better handle on the noise, but with limited success due to the acoustics created by the rink boards and positioning of the rink.

This amenity and its use is too great to lose for any extended period of time. With construction in Dufferin Grove and Wallace-Emerson ongoing for at least another year, options for skating in the area are substantially reduced.

Providing a concrete pad in a designated area within Christie Pits to be determined jointly by the Councillor's office and Parks staff will ensure that the concerns of residents - who remain steadfastly supportive of the use, but not of the current location - can be addressed while providing a space within the same Park to continue to skate.

Councillor Shelley Carroll, seconded by Councillor Joe Cressy, recommends that:

1. City Council request the Government of Ontario to withdraw its amendment to the Municipal Elections Act as it relates to ranked ballot elections.

On October 20, 2020, the Provincial government tabled Bill 218, Supporting Ontario's Recovery and Municipal Elections Act, 2020. This Bill revokes the framework in place as part of the Municipal Elections Act to allow municipalities to elect Council members using ranked ballots. 

As the level of government that most directly interacts with residents everyday lives, municipalities are best positioned to decide whether ranked ballots make sense in their jurisdiction. Several Ontario municipalities have already completed significant work to proceed with ranked ballots. The Government of Ontario should respect that work and the will of those people and their elected representatives. 

In Toronto, Council has voted several times on the matter of ranked choice voting, most recently to proceed with the consultations required under the current framework for the use of ranked ballots for the 2026 election. The rationale that ranked ballots will interfere with the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic surely does not apply. 

Councillor Shelley Carroll, seconded by Councillor Michael Thompson, recommends that:

1. City Council request the Civic Appointments Committee to make every effort to fill the Toronto Transit Commission Board public member vacancy with a member of the Black, Indigenous and People of Colour (BIPOC) community and to give preference to transit riders and persons with disabilities.

The first recommendation contained within the report from the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild is as follows:

"For its part, the City should lead by example and address racism against Black and Indigenous people openly and honestly within the City in its hiring and promotional practices. In addition, the City should set standards for Black and Indigenous representation at the tables where priorities, planning, investments and implementation of City Council decisions are discussed. Moreover, the City should also address the representation of Black, Indigenous and people from other vulnerable populations on Agencies, Boards and Corporations in order to ensure that the decisions made by these City bodies reflect the communities they serve."

Recently, the Toronto Transit Commission accepted the resignation of Alan Heisey and thanked him for his truly exemplary years of dedication to his role on the Board of Directors. Consequently, a vacancy for a public member has arisen on the Toronto Transit Commission Board. The City Clerk is currently accepting applications from residents of Toronto to fill this vacancy, with the Civic Appointments Committee to review the matter later in 2020 or early 2021.

Given the expert recommendation above, and given the crucial work of the Toronto Transit Commission Board during the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent recovery, it is essential that City Council take the opportunity to respond to the Toronto Office of Recovery and Rebuild report and the City’s own diversity policies.

Deputy Mayor Denzil Minnan-Wong, seconded by Mayor John Tory, recommends that: