Who did what

• Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4) movedMoved and carried Deputy Mayor Malik's motion on the item; asked several pressing questions of staff about whether a formal plan exists, corporate beneficiaries, and the city's red lines; summarized that city staff and public have not been given full plans and the beneficiaries remain hidden.

From the floor

“The city is the party that has the planning responsibilities to residents. The city is the party that has to think about waterfront neighborhoods, schools, daycares, parks, complete communities, and the long-term integrity of the central waterfront vision. And the city is the level of government most clearly grounded in the daily reality that of people who bear those costs.”Speaker not identified

“Our waterfront is priceless. Our health is priceless and I have no intention of letting them take these things away from us for the sake of their profits.”Speaker not identified

“The current proposal would run right across that sailing area and constrain navigation through there. And jet blast wind speed at the edge of the marine exclusion zone boundary could cause small recreational boats to become unstable or at risk of capsizing.”Speaker not identified

“Research from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego has confirmed that sewage polluted water can transfer into the atmosphere through aerosols which can carry bacteria and chemical compounds from the water into the air where they can travel inland and expose people who never enter the water.”Speaker not identified

“The province and the Toronto Port Authority need to publicly reveal their plans, their business case, and the studies related to the expansion of the island airport. Torontonians and the public deserve to have those answers and to be seen very clearly in terms of whose interest this is all happening in.”Councillor Ausma Malik (Ward 10)

“The airport itself appears to be an entity that is being directed entirely from a foreign country. And it is very disturbing for people to find that out and I know we all want to know more.”Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 14)

“As of today, we do not know what person or persons or corporate entity ultimately controls and benefits from any proposal to expand that facility. So we can't really see through the corporate veil to know who the man behind the curtain is.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4)

Also in this item

• JP Morgan Investment Management (a subsidiary of JP Morgan Chase) is identified as an affiliate of the Infrastructure Investment Fund, which owns Newport Aviation (operator of Billy Bishop terminal). The report traces Newport ownership through Affinity Terminal Partners LP and NIPGP Trust, but city staff cannot determine ultimate controlling interests without retaining a specialist consultant. Staff were unable to verify who appoints Newport's board or controls its direction.

• The 2017 Porter proposal environmental assessment showed that closing the western gap of the inner harbor would reduce water inflow by over 50% and double the average residence time of water in the harbor. This is known to correlate with degraded water quality, increased E. coli and nutrients, higher risk of beach closures, and health effects for lake users. Current plans for a 600m+ runway extension would worsen these impacts.

• City staff confirmed they have not been provided a formal, comprehensive plan by the Toronto Port Authority or the province. The media reports suggest a 10-million-passenger capacity with potential expropriation of Little Norway Park and waterfront land, but no official plan has been submitted. Staff cannot assess impacts without a formal proposal.

• The report identifies that new buildings near the expanded airport would require enhanced building envelopes, non-operable windows, mechanical-only ventilation, and outdoor-space restrictions. The current ASHRAE ventilation standard (62.1) was not designed to protect against fine particulate matter or airborne pathogens, creating public health risks during power outages that coincide with poor-air-quality and heat events.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Residents can contact councillors before the next council vote on any motions arising from this committee discussion, respond to the federal government's summer 2026 consultation on the Tripartite Agreement, and continue submitting deputations if further committee hearings are held. A supplemental staff report addressing corporate-ownership transparency is expected at council.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“This is an example, a true example of efficiency. It is unbelievably expensive to all of us to have people who are homeless and showing up in emergency rooms or showing up at police stations. But here we're actually saving public money by making a public investment. This is a public public public partnership between the city of Toronto, the UHN, a public entity, and two other orders of government who are providing money. It's when the public institutions that belong to people work in concert to achieve outcomes that we really find a way forward.”Councillor Gord Perks (Ward 4)

“Having a home changed that. For the first time in a long time, I had a place where I felt safe. I could sleep through the night, focus on my health, and start building routines that other people take for granted. I wasn't given a roof over my head. I was given the opportunity to rebuild my life. What makes Dun House special isn't just the apartment. It's the people. The staff know you by name.”Speaker not identified

“Many mailboxes in our building go unopened for weeks at a time because people don't think there's going to be anything there of value. There's going to be no resident parking. People will walk, take transit, use an Uber. How and when? How will people get their families, their kids to extracurricular activities like hockey and soccer and baseball?”Speaker not identified

“I certainly welcome the city's decision to replace Straw House left vacant for many years with a new structure, a new home for some of the many people in need of supportive housing in our city. However, I have concerns about the project as it now stands. The city to take this opportunity to seize that green space and put an eight-story building on the site, giving downtown Toronto a net loss of precious green space.”Speaker not identified

“The project proposes a new community garden will be made in the adjacent parkland. This means that years of established plants and trees and habitat will be destroyed. Community garden members have proposed a plan to maintain all or part of the existing garden site while still accommodating development. To simply move a garden on paper is certainly different in reality from the years of growth and habitat that have been established.”Speaker not identified

“There is no magic money tree. The eight-story building includes 81 new supportive housing units in a standalone building A along with 236 market rate apartments. While our housing now TTO volunteers are 100% in support of this new affordable housing redevelopment project, we would like a clear explanation for the city staff choice matrix that resulted in only having a 40-year affordability period for the 60 new affordable units within building B versus the 99-year affordability period that was achieved under other sites developed via private partnerships.”Speaker not identified

“As a regular TTC user, I will tell you many mornings I wait for five street cars on King at the corner of Strachan before I'm able to get on one. The idea of putting thousands of new residents in our neighborhood, we're going to have two new towers at the corner of King and Strachan. We have four towers going up on Tecumseth just a block away. We are already getting six new towers in this neighborhood with transit that already doesn't work.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• This is a City-owned Toronto Builds initiative site, not a private development. The public-sector financing and operation model is explicitly contrasted by Perks with problematic public-private partnerships, framing this as a structural approach to affordable housing delivery.

• Mark Richardson and Housing Now TTO requested supplementary transparency information be provided to staff before the council vote, including clarification on why this Toronto Builds project uses a 40-year affordability period vs. the 99-year periods achieved in earlier Housing Now projects (2019-2024). This flags a policy shift in affordability terms that may not be transparent in the staff report.

• Sandy Douglas testified that the city's public consultation process had serious procedural flaws: 9,000 notices mailed but not received by nearby residents, document addresses that reference non-existent buildings (57 Strachan, 801 Wellington in the middle of the park), and five to six people inserted into the April 15 public meeting to argue 'higher and faster,' with denial by facilitators but apparent skewing of final comments toward those terms.

• The community garden occupies public land within the development site and has 60 plots and over 100 gardeners; the proposal displaces it to an adjacent park area that is a known drainage/low area and already heavily used by dog walkers and residents. Community gardeners have proposed a plan to preserve at least part of the existing site.

• The neighborhood is already receiving six new towers in close proximity (two at King and Strachan, four on Tecumseth), with the Ontario Line (which would provide adequate transit) estimated to be 10 years away. Residents raised concerns that the building's car-free design ignores the practical need for services, ambulances, deliveries, and visitors on a narrow two-lane street.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Council vote on this item is scheduled for later in July 2026. Residents can contact councillors before that vote or attend the public hearing at council. Mark Richardson (Housing Now TTO) requested supplementary information be provided before council vote, so there may be a brief window for comment on amended staff reports.

Decision

Approved on committee vote (unanimous); moves to City Council for final decision.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11) movedMoved the motion to direct staff to study speeding up the 506; then cross-examined deputant Leblanc over his cost claims and elicited large staff cost estimates
• Councillor Jamaal Myers (Ward 23) secondedSeconded the motion and chaired; questioned deputants on scope and jurisdiction
• Councillor Alejandra Bravo (Ward 9) voted againstVoted no despite College serving her ward, arguing against singling out one line over a system-wide approach
• A citizen commissioner questioned staffQuestioned whether College is the 'most burning priority' and how it fits the Q1 2027 network study; pressed staff on cost-benefit prioritization

From the floor

“Even though college serves my community, I can't support a motion that is only addressing one street carline.”Councillor Alejandra Bravo (Ward 9)

“Traffic congestion will be a top issue in the municipal election... If you don't support transit priority, we voters will vote for candidates who do.”A deputant

“If you've done everything in your power already to speed up street cars, why move this motion now?”Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11)

“I am working with a team of planners and experts, but nonetheless, I don't have the resources of a city council.”A deputant

“At $1 million we don't see how you could take the entire 14 kilometer route and 60 stops of direction and make it more reliable.”City staff

Also in this item

• Staff put costs on the record: roughly $200M+ to raise ~655 streetcar stops plus $50M for vehicle self-leveling for level boarding, and about $160M for double-point switches network-wide.

• A sitting commissioner (Saxe) used most of the debate to cross-examine a citizen advocate whose competing plan was released to media eight days before her motion, unusual treatment of a deputant.

• Staff confirmed a TTC streetcar network strategy with early findings due Q1 2027 is already underway, plus a 'surface transit toolkit', the study largely duplicates directions already given.

• A declared Ward 11 council candidate deputed on the item, and multiple deputants explicitly tied transit priority to the October 2026 election.

The journey

What happens next

Staff report back is expected in early 2027; a companion motion sits at the Infrastructure and Environment Committee on city-controlled measures. Residents on the corridor can push for the consultation channel deputants requested and watch for the streetcar network strategy findings (Q1 2027).

Decision

Motion adopted directing TTC staff to report back (early 2027) on measures within TTC control to improve the speed and reliability of the 506 streetcar. Commissioner Bravo opposed; not unanimous.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11) movedMoved to adopt staff's revised wording clarifying exempted areas for investigation to improve policy language and ensure the city says what it means without unnecessary scope.

From the floor

“I have been working intensively with staff over the last little while to tighten up the language in this policy to make sure that we actually say what we mean and no more than what we mean.”Councillor Dianne Saxe (Ward 11)

“The primary change with regards to provincial regulations is that back in October the province made amendments to Ontario regulation 15304, and in that change what they did is they took away a municipality's right to request records of site condition for development lands that do not pose any risk to the municipality for conveyances.”City staff

“Some of those the city does not accept even though the ministry accepts them and the industry was pushing for the city to align ourselves more with what the ministry accepts, but that would put undue risk and cost on the city if we adopted those measures.”City staff

Also in this item

• Ontario stripped municipalities of the right to request site-condition records for greenfield sites, effective October 2025, narrowing Toronto's environmental oversight on low-risk land transfers under development agreements.

The journey

You can still act

On the Toronto City Council agenda for 2026-07-29

Decision

Amended policy approved by committee; staff's revised language clarifying exempted areas (e.g., near subway tunnels versus bus shelters) was adopted following Councillor Saxs's motion.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

From the floor

“I was here a month ago to oppose a bylaw amendment which was passed against my recommendations. So, I'm here again today on another development.”Speaker not identified

“the Scarbo Community Council defer consideration of this application until the applicant has provided an updated comprehensive microclimate, solar, and transportation impact study that accounts for the cumulative impacts of the adjacent tree canopy that's going to be removed from the Bellamy project.”Speaker not identified

“These developments is four in the area that are happening and they're large developments. Our little area is adjacent to the Dorothy McCarthy trail and Scarbo Bluffs. With these large developments coming into single family homes area um it is going to cause a lot of damage to the environment to the community and also to the lifestyle.”Speaker not identified

“The wind study does not incorporate the 100 plus trees that are going to be removed from Bellamy Road south which is adjacent to that other development. So that's erosion, that's uh wind gusts um and that is um a problem for migration, not to mention transportation.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• Resident identifies four concurrent large developments in a small single-family area and claims individual environmental and traffic studies do not assess cumulative impact; argues for holistic review before approval.

• Wind study relied upon is from 2020 and does not account for tree removal from adjacent Bellamy project (100+ trees); resident contends this gap obscures actual microclimate and erosion risk.

The journey

What happens next

If the deferral motion is brought formally, residents can contact Councillor Thompson or other members to support it before a vote; Hermas's motion text is on the record and available for deputation or written submission at the next occurrence of this item.

Decision

20 Chatterton Boulevard fence exemption approved (5-0). Kingston Road zoning amendment deferral motion: no recorded vote or outcome.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 14) movedChair opening remarks; indicated she had requested the staff report

From the floor

“There are 10 gaps along this 75 km loop trail that could be easily fixed. And we hope you also don't ignore community groups fighting for the connection from Taylor Creek via the proposed West Scarborough rail trail to the Meadowway.”Speaker not identified

“The gaps won't be closed till 2035. So that's not a serious timeline. Imagine riding the loop with a family member. Let's say they're 8 years old. You come across the dangerous underpass on Finch Avenue.”Speaker not identified

“Scarborough needs and deserves new safe and accessible connections to the loop trail, the Meadowway and Rouge National Park to support ecological health, improved access to natural areas, expand opportunities for recreation and active transportation.”Speaker not identified

“The Scarborough wine contains grievance, gripe, lack of infrastructure, lack of connections. It's kind of a bitter wine and it's time that we made that wine sweeter and we want to connect to the rest of Toronto.”Speaker not identified

“Following the motion from city council, the west Scarborough rail path, there is work underway with TTC on the design of a parallel bridge. That is well underway, it's funded, and once we have an update on that we'll be updating the feasibility study work that was previously done.”City staff

“We do need to find the money. The partnerships are so important. The federal government has been a very good partner on all of these large TRCA city projects. Let's do the easy ones, plan the complicated ones, find the money, get people on the trails and discovering our city.”Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 14)

Also in this item

• Staff stated design work on a parallel bridge for the West Scarborough Rail Trail is funded and underway with the TTC, answering a key infrastructure question that has been blocking community momentum.

• A motion from city council by Councilor Kandival calling for a 10% design study that includes the West Scarborough Rail Trail was referenced by the deputant, suggesting prior council direction exists on this project.

• The first phase of the East Don Trail (4.5 kilometres) cost $22 million (half city, half federal funding) and involved complicated environmental assessments with multiple bridges, establishing precedent and cost baselines for similar multi-government trail projects.

• Staff acknowledged that bike lanes were previously removed from Scarborough (Pharmacy, Birchmount, and a segment of Brimley), framing current trail investments as partial compensation for past disinvestment in that ward.

The journey

What happens next

Residents can attend the September 27 loop trail community ride to engage with councillors and candidates. Interested parties can contact city staff and transportation department (contact information to be provided by staff) to participate in upcoming community meetings on the West Scarborough Rail Trail design. Residents can advocate with their councillors to prioritize federal funding applications and motion support at the TTC board for the project.

Decision

Staff committed to meeting with the Scarborough Junction community in the coming weeks to discuss the West Scarborough Rail Trail project and coordinate with TTC on bridge design. Design work on the parallel bridge is funded and underway. No formal motion or vote occurred; the item closed after discussion and staff commitments.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video

Who did what

• Councillor Michael Thompson (Ward 21) movedMoved deferral to allow further community discussion and exploration of cumulative development impact, citing insufficient information on Cliffside area character and community concerns.
• Councillor Neethan Shan (Ward 25) secondedSupported the deferral motion (recorded vote tally).

From the floor

“The fact that the community is coming out saying look we still have some concerns... I do think there's an opportunity here for more work to be done. Let's afford the community an opportunity to be able to have further discussion.”Councillor Michael Thompson (Ward 21)

“The character analysis of the Cliffside area in the community, I'm not comfortable that we have enough information that helps us to say let's just move this along and approve it today.”Councillor Michael Thompson (Ward 21)

“I'm not comfortable moving something like this forward without having all those answers and the community understanding the impact. The community association has been asking for years about trying to understand the cumulative impact of development on their neighborhood.”Speaker not identified

Also in this item

• Councilor Mantis cited cumulative development concerns specifically: Doris McCarthy Trail lacks public parking; Bellamy and Kingston Road project raised school-capacity issues at Bliss Karman; residents cannot walk to local schools and must be bused out of the community.

The journey

What happens next

Residents can continue engaging with the city and developers during the deferral period through the scheduled community consultation. Timing and next steps were not specified on the record.

Decision

Item deferred for further community consultation; no expansion approved at this time.

Watch it happen

Jump to this item in the meeting video