Importance of Natural Resources

Infrastructure and Environment Committee – September 9, 2019


.
>> GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. COUNCILLORS. COUNCILLOR, MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC, WELCOME TO MEETING 7 OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE. GUYS, GUYS, GUYS YOU HAD ALL
SUMMER TO TALK ABOUT THAT STUFF. COUNCILLORS, COMMITTEE MEMBERS
WE’RE DOWN TO BUSINESS. ALTHOUGH SUMMER’S TECHNICALLY
NOT OVER HERE IT IS. WELCOME TO MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL IN ATTENDANCE IF THEY
COME AND OF COURSE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. FOR THOSE IN THE
ROOM WITH US THE SCREEN IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM PROVIDES REAL
TIME UPDATES CONCERNING WHERE WE ARE IN THE AAGENDA AND WHAT’S
COMING UP NEXT. ONE FOLLOW ON YOUR SMART PHONE. WE GRATEFULLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THE LAND WE ARE MEETING ON IS THE TRADITIONAL TERRITORY OF
MANY NATIONS INCLUDING THE MISSISSAUGAS OF THE CREDIT, THE
ANISHNABEG, THE CHIPPEWA, THE HAUDENOSAUNEE AND THE WENDAT
PEOPLES AND IS NOW HOME TO MANY DIVERSE FIRST NATIONS, INUIT AND
METIS PEOPLES. WE ALSO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT TORONTO IS
COVERED BY TREATY 13 WITH THE MISSISSAUGAS OF THE CREDIT ARE THERE ANY DECLARATION OF
INTEREST? NONE. CONFIRMATION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JUNE
27TH, 2019, MEETING, MOVE BY COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE, ALL THOSE
IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. THAT IS CARRIED. SO LET’S — LET’S RUN THROUGH
THE AGENDA. ITEM 7.1 AMENDMENT TO BLANKET
CONTRACT TO UPPER CANADA ROAD SERVICES PROVISION DURABLE
PAVEMENT MARKINGS. JUST TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION SOME OF
THESE PROCUREMENT ISSUES ARE EXISTING CONTRACTS IN WHICH
WE’RE ADDING MONEY WHICH ALWAYS GETS ATTENTION ON WHY WE’RE
RENEGOTIATING THESE FOR EXTRA MONEY IF YOU WANT TO HOLD ANY OF
THEM TO FIND OUT WHY WE’RE — WE’RE — WE HAVE TO TOP THEM UP,
THAT’S FINE. 7.1. THAT’S —
I’M JUST SAYING WHEN WE — 7.1 ACTUALLY DOES ADD AN AMOUNT OF
350,000. YOU WANT TO HOLD IT THAT’S FINE,
IF YOU WANT TO MOVE IT IT’S A SMALL AMOUNT. MOVED BY
COUNCILLOR COLLE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? DO YOU WANT TO HOLD IT? OPPOSED — IT WAS A LOT OF MONEY
WHEN I WAS YOUR AGE, COUNCILLOR LAYTON. 7.2 CONTRACT AWARD FOR
TENDER LIQUID TRAIN UPGRADES AT THE HIGHLAND CREEK TREATMENT —
>> [OFF MIC]. >>YEAH, WE DID MOVE IT AND IT
CARRIED. IT’S BEEN ADOPTED. >> 7.2 CONTRACT AWARD FOR
TENDER CALL FOR LIQUID TRAIN UPGRADES AT HIGHLAND CREEK
TREATMENT PLANT, AN AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE ORDER. AMENDMENT TO —
MOVED BY COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED.
THAT IS CARRIED. ITEM NUMBER 3, AMENDMENT OF
CONTRACT FOR SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE FOR
TORONTO WATER, WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS.
ADDING AN ADDITIONAL $552,000 TO THE CONTRACT. WHAT WOULD YOU
LIKE TO DO? >> [OFF MIC].
>>MOVED BY COUNCILLOR COLLE, ALL THOSE IF FAVOR? OPPOSED.
THAT IS CARRIED. ITEM 4, AMENDMENT TO EXPIRED CONTRACT
SUPCO CONSTRUCTION FOR BACKHOE SERVICES WITH OPERATORS. ONE AGAIN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT.
COUNCILLOR COLLE IS HOLDING NUMBER 4. AMENDMENT TO BLANKET CONTRACT
FOR — THIS IS ITEM 7.5, AMENDMENT TO BLANKET CONTRACT
HYDRAULIC FLUSHING CLEANING AND CLOSED CIRCUIT TELLING
INSPECTION OF BOTH SERVICE LATERAL DRAINS AND MAIN-LINE
SEWERS WITH PIPETEK INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES INC.
ONCE AGAIN AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT ADDING TO THE EXISTING CONTRACT. COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE IS MOVING
IT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? IT’S CARRIED. ITEM 7.6 AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW RESIDENTIAL WATER AND SEWER
CONNECTIONS FOR THE ASSOCIATED WORKS WITHIN SCARBOROUGH
DISTRICTS AND OJCR CONSTRUCTION LIMITED. AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $432,000. MOVED BY COUNCILLOR
MCKELVIE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED. ITEM 7.7, NON-COMPETITIVE
CONTRACT WITH LANDS AND FORESTS FOR CONSULTING FOR PRESCRIBED
BURN SERVICES, 2020-2024. >> I’LL MOVE THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATION. >> COUNCILLOR LAYTON IS MOVING
7.7, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED. SO 7.8 IS BEING HELD FOR
PRESENTATION AND SPEAKERS. SO I WILL HOLD THAT. AND 7.9 IT’S A REPORT FOR INFORMATION
NUMBER OF TICKETS ISSUED AND CHARGES LAID AGAINST BUILDERS
FOR FAILURE TO PROTECT CITY TREES. DO YOU WANT TO HOLD IT
FOR DISCUSSION OR JUST MOVE IT. >> YES, I’VE GOT SOME
QUESTIONS. >> OKAY, COUNCILLOR LAYTON IS
HOLDING 7.9. 7.10 IS HELD FOR SPEAKERS. AND 2020 ONTARIO CANADA
AGREEMENT GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AND ECOSYSTEM HEALTH. .
>> MAYBE IF WE COULD JUST GET STAFF TO WHEN THE ITEM COMES UP
MENTION SOME OF THE TOP LINE ITEMS. — HERE ANY WAY —
>> WE’LL HOLD 7.11 IN COUNCILLOR LAYTON’S NAME.
>> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE A NEW ITEM. IT’S BEEN
DISTRIBUTED. >> [OFF MIC] .
>> YOU HAVE ANOTHER ONE? >> [OFF MIC].
>> OKAY. COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG HAS A
MOTION. HAS EVERYONE TAKEN A LOOK AT IT?
I’LL READ IT OUT AND THERE’S — SO COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG IS
MOVING A NEW ITEM ONTO THE AGENDA. THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE
AND PLANNING COMMITTEE, WE’RE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND
ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE. REQUEST — OKAY. AND
ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE. I’LL MAKE THAT AMENDMENT HERE.
REQUEST THE GENERAL MANAGER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES PROVIDE
AN UPDATE ON THE MANAGEMENT PLAN IN THE NEXT MEETING OF THE
COMMITTEE. I WOULD MOVE TO ADD THAT TO THE AGENDA. I WILL MOVE THAT TO ADD THAT TO
AGENDA, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED. AND
I’M TAKING CARE OF — YOU HAVE A MOTION BECAUSE IT’S RATHER
URGENT ITEM BECAUSE OF SOME TIME LINES WITH THE PROVINCE TO MOVE
A MOTION FOR DISCUSSION HERE ON E SCOOTER OVERSIGHT AND
MANAGEMENT MEET SOME DEADLINES WITH THE PROVINCE AND LOOKING
FOR SOME DIRECTION FROM COMMITTEE. AND IT BUILDS ON AN
EARLIER MOTION THAT IS BEEN ADOPTED BY THIS COMMITTEE FROM
APRIL 25TH, 2019. I BELIEVE THAT WAS COUNCILLOR LAYTON’S
MOTION. THIS JUST INTRODUCED. THE
REASON THIS IS COMING, AND I’M JUST ALMOST MOVING ON BEHALF OF
STAFF IS SEPTEMBER 12TH DEADLINE TO GET FEEDBACK FROM MUNICIPALITIES ON PROVINCIAL
CHANGES TO — IN THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ON E-SCOOTERS. SO JUST TO ADD IT TO THE AGENDA,
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED. SO WE’RE ALREADY ON ITEM 7.8, I
BELIEVE STAFF HAVE A PRESENTATION. SO WE CAN HEAR
THE PRESENTATION THEN WE’LL GO TO DEPUTANTS AND THEN WE’LL GO
TO COMMITTEE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
REPORT. NORMALLY WE ALLOCATE 10 MINUTES
FOR PRESENTATIONS I HOPE THAT WILL SUFFICE. >> GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. MY
NAME IS JANE WELSH. I’M HERE WITH MY COLLEAGUE. AND I’M HERE
ALSO WITH COLLEAGUES FROM CITY PLANNING, TF AND R AND ALSO THE
TORONTO REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY. — STRATEGY WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY
AN INDIGENOUS MEMBER OF THE ADVISORY GROUP SHE TALKS ABOUT
THE FACT THAT TORONTO IS NAMED FOR THE MOHAWK — WHERE THERE
ARE TREES AND WATER. AND THAT REALLY DESCRIBES A DEEP ROOTED
AN MEANINGFUL RELATIONSHIP IN NATURAL STEWARD SHIP BETWEEN THE
PEOPLE AND THIS PLACE. LOSS IS AN ISSUE THAT’S
GLOBAL-WIDE AND IT’S UNPRECEDENTED THE AMOUNT THAT
WE’RE LOSING ON A DAILY BASIS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. SO THE
BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY ALIGNS AND CONSISTENT WITH NATIONAL
POLICIES SUCH AS UNITED NATIONS AND ALSO CANADA AND ONTARIO BIODIVERSITY STRATEGIES. THE PROTECTION STRATEGY AND THE
— STRATEGY. AND IMPORTANTLY IT
ALIGNS WITH AND ADDRESSES 3 ISSUES THAT CROSS OVER BOTH
BIODIVERSITY AND RAVINES AND THAT IS MANAGEMENT OF INVASIVE
SPECIES, ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY AND THE PROTECTING OF NATIVE
PLANTS. SO BASICALLY BIODIVERSITY REFERS
SIMPLY PUT TO THE VARIETY OF SPECIES AND AMONG SPECIES. IN
TORONTO WE’RE VERY FORTUNATE WE HAVE A VERY BIODIVERSE REGION,
BORDERED BY 2 MAJOR FOREST ZONES, WE’RE ON THE FLYWAY FOR
BIRDS. AND SURPRISINGLY ALMOST 14% OF THE CITY ACTUALLY
PROVIDES HABITAT. AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THERE WAS A
STUDY THAT THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITY AND THE CITY DID LAST
YEAR AND DETERMINED THAT RAVINES PROVIDE $822 MILLION OF
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES EVERY YEAR ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. AND ECOSYSTEM
SERVICES PROTECTION FROM EROSION, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT,
YOU KNOW, RELIEF FROM HEAT RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES AND
MENTAL HEALTH. SO IT’S QUITE AMAZING. WE’VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT
BIODIVERSITY FOR A LONG TIME IN THE CITY. WE PRODUCED A SERIES
OF BIODIVERSITY BOOKLETS WE’VE JUST PREPRINTED BIRDS OF
TORONTO. COPY. AND COUNCILLOR LAYTON HAD
SUGGESTED SOME TIME AGO THAT WE WE — THE CITY SHOULD PREPARE A
BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY AND WE DID THAT AND THAT DRAFT WAS BEFORE
COMMITTEE A YEAR AGO. SINCE THEN WE’VE UNDERTAKEN
SUBSTANTIVE CONSULT TAKES WITH THE PUBLIC. WE’VE HAD 4 PUBLIC
MEETINGS. THE CONSERVATION AUTHORITY, TORONTO FIELD
NATIONALISTS PROTECT NATURE, THE ONTARIO INVASIVE PLANT COUNCIL
AND REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO, YORK AND
— SO IT’S QUITE SUBSTANTIVE. WE HAD 4 PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES, WE
ALSO HAD 2 WORKSHOPS WITH THE STUDY GROUP.
SO WE HAD GREAT FEEDBACK AND IT MADE A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE
DRAFT STRATEGY TO THE PRODUCT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY.
STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY, WE NEED
TO CONSIDER ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY, WE NEED MORE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR CITIZEN STEWARDSHIP WE NEED MORE
AWARENESS OF BIODIVERSITY AND ALSO TO PROMOTE NATIVE SPECIES
TO DO BETTER MANAGEMENT OF INVASIVE SPECIES AND WE HAVE
AUTHENTIC MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT WITH INNER LOOPED COMMUNITIES.
THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY AN IS A COORDINATED EFFORT PROVIDING A
LONG-TERM ROAD MAP THAT IDENTIFIES AND ALIGNS
INTERDIVISIONAL AND INTERAGENCY POLICIES, OPERATIONS AND ACTIONS
INTO ONE DOCUMENT. THE PURPOSE OF THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY IS
TO FIRST AND FOREMOST PROTECT THE HEALTH OF OUR EXISTING
NATURAL AREAS AND SECONDLY TO RESTORE AND ENHANCE THE QUALITY
AND QUALITY TEE OF HABITAT ACROSS THE CITY. IT AIMS TO
INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS OF THE ENORMOUS VALUE NATURE AND
BIODIVERSITY IN THE CITY, AND FINALLY IT ACKNOWLEDGES THE WORK
THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR DECADES RELATED TO PROTECTING
AND ENHANCING OUR NATURAL AREAS AND IDENTIFIES NEW OPPORTUNITIES
AND THE GAPS THAT WE NEED TO FILL TO IMPROVE OUR COORDINATED
EFFORTS. WE RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE
SIGNIFICANT THREATS TO TORONTO’S BIODIVERSITY. THESE INCLUDE
HABITAT LOSS THROUGH GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, INVASIVE SPECIES
THAT COMPROMISE THE GROWTH OF NATIVE SPECIES, CLIMATE CHANGE
WHICH IS CAUSING EXTREME WEATHER EVENTS AND LONGER GROWING
SEASONS AND ALLOWING NON-NATIVE SPECIES TO BECOME MORE PROLIFIC.
AND HUMAN ACTIVITIES WHICH OF COURSE HAPPEN ON PUBLIC AS WELL
AS ON PRIVATE LAND. THE CITY AND PARTNERS LIKE THE
TORONTO REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY HAVE BEEN LEADING WORK
TO IMPROVE CONDITIONS FOR DECADES.
TORONTO’S OFFICIAL PLAN LEADS ALL WORK THROUGH STRONG PARKS
AND OPEN SPACE, AND NATURAL HERITAGE POLICIES WHICH ALLOWS
CITY BYLAWS TO REGULATE ACTIVITIES RELATED TO TREES,
RAVINES, NATURAL FEATURES AND GREEN ROOMS. THE FOREST TEE
BRANCH — NATURAL AREAS AND IN 2018 ALONE HOSTED OVER 260 VENTS
ENGAGING OVER 3,700 VOLUNTEERS. WE PLANTED CLOSE TO 20,000
NATIVE TREES, SHRUBS AND WHILE FLOWERS. THE CITY ACTIVELY
MANAGES INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES IN 72 SITES AND AN ADDITIONAL 46
OF TORONTO’S ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS. A REQUEST
FOR PROPOSALS TO DEVELOP A FRAMEWORK FOR BEST MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES FOR ALL OF TORONTO’S ESAs IS ANTICIPATED TO BE
AWARDED EARLY NEXT YEAR. FINALLY TORONTO SUPPORTS
BIODIVERSITY ACROSS THE BUILT FORM IN THE PUBLIC REALM THROUGH
INITIATIVES SUCH AS THE GREEN STANDARD AND TORONTO’S GREEN
STREETS. I JUST WANT TO TAKE A MINUTE TO NOTE THAT THROUGH THE
TRCAs WATER SHED REPORT CARD SYSTEM IN THE PAST TORONTO HAS
RECEIVED A COLLECTIVE GRADE OF D. I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT
THAT THIS IS AN ESTIMATED AVERAGE OF ALL THE WATER SHEDS
AND APPLIES TO 4 MAJOR THEMES OF GROUND WATER QUALITY, SURFACE
WATER QUALITY, FOREST CONDITIONS AND LAND COVER BUT TO BE CLEAR
THIS IS NOT A MEASUREMENT OF BIODIVERSITY. THE BIODIVERSITY
STRATEGY IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY TRCA AND PARTNERS
DEVELOP AN INTEGRITY MONITORING FRAMEWORK AS THERE IS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO BETTER MONITOR AND EVALUATE TORONTO’S
BIODIVERSITY WHICH CAN COME LAW MEANT THE SCIENCE MONITORING AND
REPORTING EFFORTS WHICH WE CURRENTLY SUPPORT WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL AND ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS. >> THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY
CONSISTS OF A VISION, 10 PRINCIPLES AND 23 ACTION. THE
PRINCIPLES INCLUDE FUNDAMENTAL TO HEALTH, KEY TO RESILIENCE,
AND TO GUIDE THE MANAGEMENT AND WE NEED TO MEASURE AND REPORT ON
RESULTS. THE 23 ACTION INCLUDE DEVELOPING
AN INTEGRITY MONITORING FRAMEWORK, REVIEWING POLICIES
AND BYLAWS FOR MORE OPPORTUNITIES TO SUPPORT
BIODIVERSITY, TO IDENTIFY PRIORITY SITES FOREST STORE
RATION TO ADVANCE PLANS AND PROGRAMS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF
INVASIVES TO EXPAND THE URBAN BIODIVERSITY BOOKLET SERIES AND
DEVELOP A GUIDE ON BACKYARD BIODIVERSITY.
>>MOST OF THE 23 ACTIONS CAN BE ACCOMMODATED WITHIN OUR EXISTING
WORK PLANS. THE POINT OF THIS DOCUMENT IS REALLY THAT IT’S AN
UMBRELLA DOCUMENT, IS A COORDINATED ACROSS CITY
DIVISIONS AND BETWEEN AGENCY PARTNERS SO THAT ALL — AROUND
BIODIVERSITY ARE IN ONE PLACE. AND OF COURSE MANY OF THE
ACTIONS TIED DIRECTLY WITH THE RAVINE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION.
THE REPORT HAS 4 RECOMMENDATION, ONE IS ADOPTING THE STRATEGY, 2
IS TO DEVELOP AN ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY MONITORING AND
REPORTING FRAMEWORK THROUGH THE ECOSYSTEMS WORKING GROUP, 3, TO
CONTINUE TO WORK ON IMPLEMENTING THE MANAGEMENT OF INVASIVES AND
TO UNDERTAKE A REVIEW OF GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE
THAT. AGAIN, THROUGH THE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES WORKING
GROUP. AND THEN FINALLY 4, TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY
OF TORONTO TO JOIN THE CITIES NETWORK. THANK YOU. AND THAT
CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. >> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
NOW, WHAT WE CAN DO IS MOVE RIGHT TO DEPUTATIONS AND THEN
ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF LATER OR IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS
RELATED TO THE PRESENTATION WE CAN ASK THEM NOW.
>> [OFF MIC]. >> WE’LL DO DEPUTATIONS, OKAY,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION AND REPORT AND
WE’LL COME TO QUESTIONS FOR STAFF A LITTLE LATER. LAURA –>> HI, WE’RE PRESENTING
TOGETHER. >> OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. >> I’M WAITING FOR THE
PRESENTATION. SGHFRM SORRY, WE’RE JUST HAVING A TECHNICAL
DIFFICULTY. THERE WE GO. >> WE HAVE LOTS OF OTHERS BUT
WE WILL LISTEN TO THIS ONE. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> THEY’RE READY TO GO. ALL SET.
>> OKAY, WE’RE READY NOW. >> OKAY K GREAT, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. >> THIS IS LAUREN SOUTH AND
WE’RE BOTH UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO STUDENTS STUDYING FOREST STORY
IN OUR UNDER GRADS. SO WE’RE HERE TODAY TALK TO YOU BY
JAPANESE KNOT WEED WHICH HIGHLY AFFECT BIODIVERSITY AS A WHOA.
>> SO WE’RE HERE TODAY SPEAKING WITH YOU BECAUSE WE SPENT ALL
SUMMER STUDYING IT AND — LOWER PARK RAVINE AND PARK DRIVE
RESERVATION LANDS. IT IS A SPECIES THAT IS REGULATED BY THE
ONTARIO INVASIVE SPECIES ACT WHERE IT’S DESIGNATED AS
RESTRICTED. IT CAN GROW UP TO 3 METERS TALL IN ONE GROWING
SEASON AND SPREADS VERY EASILY WHICH MAKES IT A BIG PROBLEM.
THE AREA WAS COMPOSED OF 2 ESAs OR ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT
AREAS. OF THE 86 ESAs CREDIT BY CITY COUNCIL MANY ARE WITHIN
RAVINE LAND. FROM OUR EXPERIENCE THIS SUMMER,
WE DO NOT THINK THAT CURRENT MANAGEMENT IS SUFFICIENT
PARTICULARLY WHEN IT COMES TO JAPANESE KNOT WEED. JAPANESE KNOTWEED DEVASTATES
INFRASTRUCTURE AND NATIVE ECOLOGY. IT IS ALSO PREVIOUS
PLANT IN CITY ALLEY WAYS AND EVEN IN PEOPLE’S YARD. IT
CAUSES STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO BUILDING FOUNDATIONS AND OTHER
GREAT INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS IS BECAUSE IT CAN GROW THROUGH UP
TO 7 CENTIMETERS THICK OF CONCRETE. IN THE UK IT HAS EVEN
BECOME SUCH A PROBLEM THAT IT DECREASES HOME VALUES AND MAKES
IT DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN MORTGAGES WHEN KNOTWEED IS PRESENT. IT
ALSO POSE AS RISK FOR LOCAL ECOLOGY. IT REDUCES NATIVE
BIODIVERSITY, SHADES OUT OTHER SPECIES EFFECTIVELY CREATING
MONOCULTURES AND INCREASES THE RISK OF EROSION. SO NOW THAT YOU UNDERSTAND HOW
WE HAVE A — HOW BIG OF A PROBLEM JAPANESE
KNOTWEED CAN POSE THESE ARE OUR STUDIES. 4,073 — THIS IS THE MAP THAT WE
PRODUCED HERE WHICH SHOWS JAPANESE KNOTWEED —
[INAUDIBLE] .
>> IF WE DO NOT IMPROVE MANAGEMENT IN OUR CITY THIS WILL
ONLY INCREASE. IN ORDER TO SEE IMPROVEMENTS WE MUST ALL WORK
TOGETHER TO PROTECT OUR CITY’S BIODIVERSITY, LET’S DO BETTER
TORONTO. THANK YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS —
>> THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COUNCILLOR LAYTON AND
THEN COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COULD
YOU PUT THE SLIDE UP OF THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE? I RAN OUT
OF TIME COPYING IT DOWN AND I WANT TO WRITE A MOTION FOR US TO
DO THAT AND COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE CAN — CAN ASK A QUESTION, THAT
MIGHT GIVE ME ENOUGH TIME. BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
WORK. >> THIS ONE.
>> CORRECT. >> OKAY.
>> THANK YOU. >> DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED,
COUNCILLOR LAYTON. >> YEP.
>> GREAT. >> FIRST I WANT TO THANK YOU
FOR COMING IN AND I AM SUPPOSED TO ASK QUESTIONS SO WOULD YOU BE
ABLE TO GO BACK TO THE PROGRAM OF FOREST STORY AND TELL OTHER
STUDENTS ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCE HERE AT CITY HALL AND ENCOURAGE
THEM TO ALSO GIVE DEPUTATIONS ON IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT —
>> FOR SURE, YES. >> AN THEN MY SECOND QUESTION
IS: I AM NOT FAMILIAR WITH JAPANESE KNOTWEED. I DON’T KNOW
IF — I LIVE IN SCARBOROUGH IF IT’S NOT AS PERVASIVE OUT THERE.
SO GIVEN THAT THIS SEEMS PRETTY UNIQUE IN PERSISTENT, LIKE WHAT
IS THE — WHAT IS THE WAY TO CONTROL THIS? LIKE IS IT JUST
BROUGHT FORCE YOU HAVE TO GO AND DIG IT OUT, HOW DO WE DEAL WITH
THIS. >> OKAY. SO THIS DOCUMENT HERE
THAT’S ON SCREEN, THE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN ONTARIO
HAS A BUNCH OF GUIDELINES ON THAT. SO THERE’S 3 MAIN —
THERE’S DIGGING SO YOU HAVE TO GET TO A CERTAIN DEPTH THAT’S
OUTLINED IN THE BEST PRACTICES DOCUMENT. IT’S SEVERAL METERS
DEEP, I BELIEVE. TARPING AS WELL. SO IF YOU PUT A TARP OVER
THE SPECIES AND BLOCK OUT THE SUNLIGHT THAT CAN GET RID OF IT.
BUT IT ALSO DEPENDS ON THE SIZE OF THE PATCH OF THE SPECIES AND
WHETHER OR NOT IT’S A SATELLITE PATCH OR A CENTRAL LARGE PATCH.
AND THAT’S ALL OUTLINED IN THIS DOCUMENT. AND WE USED THIS
DOCUMENT TO ORGANIZE OUR STUDY AS WELL. SO THERE’S GOOD
INFORMATION IN THERE. >> AND ALSO IT’S — IT’S STILL
BEING DISCOVERED. SO THE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ARE
GUIDELINES FOR NOW BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE STUDY TO ENSURE
THAT THESE PRACTICES ARE ACTUALLY THE BEST METHOD. SO
IT’S A PROBLEM THAT IS GOING TO NEED CONTINUED RESEARCH.
>> AN THEN FOR THIS, WHAT IS IT LIKE —
WHAT ULTIMATELY ARE ITS IMPACTS? YOU MENTIONED THE INFRASTRUCTURE
ONES BUT WHO IS IT OUT COMPETING OR WHAT FUNCTION IS IT REPLACING
IN THESE RAVINES THAT WE ARE MISSING OUT BY HAVING IT THERE?
>>WELL, BECAUSE IT CREATES THESE MONOCULTURES OF JUST ITS
OWN SPECIES BASICALLY UNDERNEATH YOU JUST HAVE BARE SOIL WITH A
FEW DIFFERENT STOCKS OF JUST THIS ONE SPECIES AND IT DOESN’T
ACTUALLY HOLD THE SOIL VERY WELL EVEN THOUGH IT HAS A VAST ROOT
SYSTEM. SO IT CAN LEAD TO MORE EROSIONS IN THE RAVINES. SO IF
YOU COULD REPLACE THIS KNOTWHEATED WITH NATIVE SPECIES
THAT HOLD SOIL BETTER AND HAVE OTHER BENEFITS SUCH AS HABITAT.
WE ALL KNOW BIODIVERSITY IS A VERY GOOD THING TO MONOCULTURES
ARE GENERALLY VERY BAD. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING IN
TODAY. >> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS
COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG. >> JAPANESE KNOTWEED, THIS IS
THE THING THAT — FROM YOUR SOIL OR GARDEN IT JUST BREAKS OFF AND
THEN THERE ARE LITTLE NUBS AT THE BOTTOM, RIGHT.
>> UM-HUM. >> YOU SAID YOU CAN DIG DOWN
AND THE WAYS THAT YOU COULD DIG DOWN AND TAKE IT OUT BUT YOU
HAVE TO GO DOWN REALLY DEEP, RIGHT?
>>YEP. THE ROOT SYSTEM IS VERY, VERY DEEP.
>> YEAH, I KNOW, IT’S ALL OVER MY GARDEN.
>>OH. >>.
>> [OFF MIC]. >> NO, IT’S TURNING JAPANESE.
IT’S NOT A GARDENING SHOW. >>NO, NO. I JUST WANT TO ASK
YOU BECAUSE I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS, I
MEAN, I’M JUST — IT’S LIKE THIS IS A FAIRLY INVASIVE —
>> [OFF MIC] >> YOU SAID YOU COULD PUT A
TARP OVER IT. >> YEAH.
>>WHAT ARE THE 2 OTHER THINGS. >> I PUT UP A SLIDE WHERE WE
HAVE — IT’S KIND OF PALE THERE BUT OF THOSE 3 IMAGES ON THE
RIGHT, THAT’S WHAT THE JAPANESE KNOTWEED ROOTING SYSTEM LOOKS
LIKE. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE SUSPECT VERY MANY ROOTS NEAR THE
SURFACE. IT’S A LOT DEEPER DOWN. DIGGING IS GOOD BUT ONCE
YOU HAVE THE ROOTS AS SOON AS LIKE IF YOU PUT THEM IN THE
COMPOST FOR EXAMPLE. >>THEY’LL GROW AGAIN?
>>YEAH. >> SO US HERBICIDES WORK TOO.
>> HERBICIDES DO WORK, YES IT’S JUST NOT AS YOU THE BEST OPTION.
>>NO, SO YOU SAY YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS BUT IT
SEEMS LIKE THE HERB SITEDS ARE THE MOST — YOU CAN’T PUT A TARP
OVER ALL OF THEM FOR EXAMPLE THAT’S NOT GOING TO WORK, RIGHT,
WELL THEY WON’T LIKE IT, BUT — >> YEAH ONE OF —
>>YOU CAN’T DIG DOWN DEEP ENOUGH TO PULL EVERYTHING OUT
AND YOU JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT OF — SO HERBICIDES IS OPTION
NUMBER 3? YOU SAID THERE WERE 4, WHAT’S THE 4TH ONE?
>>MAYBE JUST 3. >> 3.
>>YEAH. >> SO BECAUSE THIS KNOTWEED IS
TAKING OVER, SO WOULD YOU ADVOCATE FOR THE USE OF
HERBICIDES TO CLEAR THIS UP. >> I THINK I’D ADVOCATE FIRST
FOR MORE STUDY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY BUT
ALSO FOR A COMBINATION OF DIFFERENT — OF
DIFFERENT REMOVAL METHODS. SO IF YOU HAVE ANOTHER METHOD IS
ALSO ACTUALLY BIOLOGICAL CONTROL WHICH THEY’RE STUDYING RIGHT
NOW. >> WHICH MEANS WHAT.
>> RELEASING THESE BUGS CALLED — AND THEY JUST EAT JAPANESE
KNOTWEED. SO IT’S A GOOD POTENTIAL BUT STILL ALSO IN THE
PROCESS OF FIGURING OUT HOW BEST TO — OR HOW EFFECTIVE THEY ARE.
SO IT’S GOOD SOMETIMES YOU CAN ALSO CUT THE ROOT OR THE STEMS
AND IT DOESN’T AFFECT THE ROOT SYSTEM. SO AND IF YOU DO THAT
IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER MANAGEMENT METHODS THAT CAN ALSO
HELP. >> KNOTWEED IS GOING IT TAKE
OVER THE WHOLE CITY. >> EVENTUALLY IF WE ADOPT —
>> THANKS. >> COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA AND
COUNCILLOR COLLE. >>IT LIKE TO SAY GROW IN — AS
WELL AS IN OPEN AREAS AND IN SHADE IT LIKE TO SAY GROW
EVERYWHERE ESSENTIALLY. SO WE FOUND IT IN THE RAVINE NEAR THE
WATER WE’VE FOUND IT NEAR THE TOP ON PEOPLE’S PRIVATE PROPERTY
AND ALONG THE SLOPES. IT SEEMS TO BE ABLE TO GROW EVERYWHERE
WHICH IS A BIG PROBLEM. >> I GUESS THE — BECAUSE IT’S
CALLED JAPANESE IT CAME FROM JAPAN, RIGHT?
>>YES. >> OKAY SO IS ALL OF JAPAN
KNOTWEED. >> NO SO AN INVASIVE SPECIES
CAN BE NON-INVASIVE IN ITS NATIVE COUNTRY. SO IN JAPAN FOR
EXAMPLE, WHERE THERE’S OTHER SPECIES THAT ARE GOOD AT
COMPETING WITH JAPANESE KNOTWEED IT WOULDN’T BE AN INVASIVE
PROBLEM BUT WHEN IT COMES THERE’S NO SPECIES TO COMPETE
WITH IT IT DOESN’T HAVE ANY COMPETITORS SO IT CAN TAKE OVER.
>> COMPETITORS IN WHAT SENSE? >>OTHER PLANTS THAT CAN GROW IN
THOSE OPEN AREAS BETTER THAN IT CAN IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
>>YEAH, GENERALLY THE NATURE OF AN INVASIVE SPECIES IS IT’S
INVASIVE IN ITS NON-NATIVE HABITAT. THEY COULD BE MAYBE THOSE —
LIKE THE INSECTS THAT ARE IN THE NATIVE HABITAT AS WELL. DOES
THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> WELL, IN PART. SO FOR
EXAMPLE, IN JAPAN THEY HAVE — THEY DON’T HAVE SOIL EROSION? I
MEAN, YOU HAVE KNOTWEED SO THEY HAVE EROSION, RIGHT, DO THEY
HAVE MORE EROSION THAN WE DO? >>I’M NOT SURE TO BE HONEST,
BUT I DON’T THINK IT’S AS — IT MAY JUST NOT CREATE THESE BIG
MONOCULTURES AS MUCH IN JAPAN. I’M JUST HONESTLY NOT SURE.
>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR
PERRUZZA. I THINK COUNCILLOR COLLE. >> [OFF MIC] MOST PEOPLE ADOPT EVEN KNOW WHAT
A JAPANESE KNOTWEED LOOKS LIKE. >> UM-HUM, YEAH, I WOULD SAY
SO. LIKE FOR EVERYONE HERE WE SHOWED SOME PICTURES AND IT ALSO
LOOKS KIND OF LIKE BAMBOO WHEN IT’S DIED OFF. SO, YEAH IT
WOULD REALLY HELP IF PEOPLE KNOW WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE BECAUSE I’VE
SEEN IT IN PEOPLE’S GARDENS. AND THEY THINK IT LOOKS VERY
PRETTY SO THEY DON’T KNOW THAT IT’S INVASIVE AND ACTUALLY CAN
BE SPREADING. >> JUST LIKE THE MAPLES PEOPLE
ARE STILL BUYING AND PLANTING. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA HAS THE MAY
PEPS IN HIS BACKYARD AND DOESN’T KNOW THEY’RE AN INVASIVE
SPECIES. HOW CAN WE REALLY DEAL WITH IT IF NOBODY RECOGNIZES
THEM OR KNOW THAT IS THESE ARE DANGEROUS INVASIVE SPECIES.
>> I THINK THAT HIGHLIGHTS A BIG ISSUE THAT WE NEED MORE
AWARENESS OF INVASIVE SPECIES. >> SO YOU WOULD THINK IT WOULD
BE HELPFUL FOR US TO SUPPORT A MOTION WHICH ASKS FOR CITY OF
TORONTO TO UNDERTAKE A ROBUST CAMPAIGN OF MAKING THE CITIZENS
OF TORONTO AWARE OF THESE MAJOR INVASIVE SPECIES, YOU KNOW,
THROUGH OR BLUE BOX CALENDAR, ALL THESE THINGS SO WE HAVE
PICTURES OF THESE SPECIES SO WE KNOW THEY’RE NOT GOOD TO HAVE IN
YOUR BACKYARD, COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA, SO THAT’S WHAT I’M
GOING TO BE MOVING. >> OH, THANK YOU.
>> THAT SOUNDS GOOD. >> [OFF MIC].
>> ARE YOU SURE? I’M GOING TO CHECK.
>> NO, IT’S NOT A GARDENING COLLEGE SHOW, BUT THANK YOU FOR
ALL YOUR OBSERVATIONS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE
DEPUTANTS. >> BRING THE PROOF.
>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> ELLEN — TORONTO FIELD
NATURALISTS. THANK YOU FOR COMING. YOU HAVE 5 MINUTES.
>> THANK YOU. THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME AND YES, I’M
REPRESENTING THE TORONTO FIELD NATURALISTS THIS MORNING. WE’VE
GOT A LONG RECORD OF EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE WITH TORONTO’S
RAVINES. WE’VE BEEN ESSENTIALLY THE EYES ON TORONTO’S RAVINES
FOR CLOSE TO A HUNDRED YEARS. AND THIS SEPTEMBER WE WANT TO
BOTH APPLAUD AND URGE ACTION ON THE CITY’S NEW STRATEGIES FOR
BIODIVERSITY AND FOR THE AVINES AND THOSE 2 STRATEGIES OF COURSE
ARE INTERLINKED BUT URGENTLY NEED TO GET ROLLING. TORONTO IS
LUCKY IN MANY WAYS. WE HAVE STILL A LOT OF NATURAL HERITAGE,
THE CITY’S EXPERTS HAVE SAID ABOUT 4% OF THE CITY’S AREA IS
STILL ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT SO THAT’S REALLY
IMPORTANT. BUT THOSE AREAS FACE INTENSE AN GROWING PRESSURES.
WE KNOW THAT DEVELOPMENT, POLLUTION, EROSION, SEVERE
WEATHER, HIGH VISITORS NUMBERS AND OF COURSE INVASIVE SPECIES
ALL ARE PUTTING PRESSURE ON THOSE RAVINES. AND THE DEGRADED
HABITAT AND THE PROBLEMS HAVE BEEN — THEY’VE BEEN ENUMERATED
IN MULTIPLE STUDIES. THE TRCA HAS BEEN STUDIES AND NOW THE
WHOLE WORLD HAS BEEN TOLD BY THE MAGAZINE ARTICLE THAT CAME OUT
IN THE END OF AUGUST. SO THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY IS A
FOUNDATION DOCUMENT NO MORE, NO LESS. AND OUR MEMBERS HOPE AN
REQUEST THAT OVER THE NEXT 1 TO 5 YEARS THAT STRATEGY IS GOING
TO HOST — IS GOING TO TRIGGER A HOST OF MEASURES ON THE GROUND.
ULTIMATELY THE PEOPLE IN TORONTO WANT TO SEE OUR CITY’S MOST
VULNERABLE NATURAL HABITATS, THE HYDE PARK, THE DON VALLEY, ALONG
THE LAKESHORE THEY WANT TO SEE THOSE PRIORITIZED, MOMENTED AND
RESTORED. WE KNOW THE STRATEGIES HAD A LONGEST
TAKINGS. THE CITY PLANNERS HAD A ROUND TABLE IN 2017, THERE WAS
A LOT OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION. SO THIS STRATEGY HAS BEEN IN THE
WORKS FOR OVER 2 AND A HALF YEARS. SO PLEASE LET’S GET THE
STRATEGY FINALIZED, LET’S START THE ACTION AND LET’S GET THE
RESULTS HAPPENING. AND THE ACTION STEPS THAT WE EMPHASIZE
ARE NEEDED. WE NEED FUNDING AND AN ACTION PLAN TO SUPPORT
STEWARDSHIP. DO YOU KNOW THAT DEDICATED VOLUNTEER GROUPS SUCH
AS THE TORONTO FIELD NATURAL LISTENS AND MANY OTHERS HAVE
ALREADY SPENT YEARS WEEDING AND PLANTING AND MULCHING IN OUR
PARKS AND RAVINES, OFTEN WITH CITY COORDINATION. BUT THE WORK
NEEDS STRONGER CITY COORDINATION TO TRIAGE THE STOP PRIORITIES,
TO SCALE UP PROJECTS AND ABOVE ALL, WHEN YOU’VE NEWLY RESTORED
A NATURAL AREA YOU NEED TO KEEP IT HEALTHY IN THE LONG-TERM. SO
BUDGET AND STAFFING HAVE GOT TO BE STRENGTHENED. AND MOST
PARTICULARLY FOR THE COMMUNITY STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM WE ALSO NEED
AS WE JUST HEARD A STRONGER FOCUS ON FIGHTING INVASIVES
BECAUSE FRANKLY THE AGGRESSIVENESS MEANS OUR NATURAL
AREAS ARE BEING EATEN ALIVE. WE AREN’T BY ANY STRETCH KEEPING
PACE WITH THE DEAD RE GAGS. AND THIRD WE NEED TO SEE PRIORITY
PROTECTION FOR THE BEST BITS OF NATURE. THEY’RE NOT ALL THE
SAME. THE CITY HAS GOT TO IDENTIFY WHICH ENVIRONMENTALLY
SIGNIFICANT AREAS MOST URGENTLY NEED MANAGEMENT PLANS AND GIVE
TEETH TO THOSE MANAGEMENT PLANS. VISION STATEMENTS ON PAPER
RESPECT GOING TO CUT IT. WE WERE PLEASED TO HEAR EARLIER
THIS YEAR THAT STAFF HAVE BEEN WORKING TO IDENTIFY THE MOST
SENSITIVE ZONES WITHIN THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT
AREAS. THOSE VALUATIONS HAVE TO BE FAST TRACKED AND WE WOULD
LIKE PROGRESS TO BE SHARED PUBLICALLY. FOR EXAMPLE, THE
CITY LED WORKSHOP ON STATUS OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT
AREAS AND THEIR MANAGEMENT PLANS WOULD BRING THE COMMUNITY UP TO
SPEED AND WOULD BE A GREAT PROJECT TO DO FOR WINTER MONTHS.
TO MANAGE SOMETHING EFFECTIVELY YOU ALSO NEED TO MONITOR. SO WE
WERE DELIGHTED TO LEARN THAT THE CITY THIS YEAR HAS ESTABLISHED
ABOUT 200 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING SITES IN RAVINES AND NATURAL
AREAS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE UFT. AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE
CITIES FOLLOWING THE LEAD OF SEVERAL OTHER MUNICIPALITIES BY
USING A TOOL CALLED VEGETATION SAMPLING PROTOCOL. AGAIN OUR
COMMUNITIES WOULD LOVE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THAT INITIATIVE
THROUGH A PUBLIC MEETING OR WORKSHOP TO BRING US ALL UP INTO
THE LOOP AND EXCHANGE EXPERTISE. SO THE CITY DOES NOT NEED TO GO
IT ALONE ON THIS, YOU CAN LEAN ON YOUR COMMUNITIES OF
VOLUNTEERS. FOR OURSELVES WE KNOW THAT WE CAN CONTRIBUTE
EXPERIENCE AND WITH RESTORATION PROJECTS THE SITES LIKE THE
GLENN STEWART RAVINE WHERE THE CITY THAT DID COMPLETE THAT IN
2012, COTTONWOOD FLATS WHERE WE CONTINUED TO LEAD A MULTI YEAR
MONITORING PROJECT AND TODD MILLS WILDLIFE PRESERVE HAVE
TAUGHT US A LOT ABOUT SETTING PRIORITIES, AND BUILDING
CAPACITIES. SO WE HAVE DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS READY TO BE
DEPLOYED. AND WE HAVE ACTIVE AND WELL-CONNECT MEMBERS WHO ARE
WORKING TO SPREAD THE WORD. SO THANKS FOR THIS OFFER — THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER OUR INPUT AND WE HOPE THAT NOVEMBER 7TH WE
CAN BE PRESENT TO APPLAUD THE ROLL OUT OF THE RAVINE STRATEGY
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. SO THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AND HAPPY TO TAKE
SOME QUESTIONS. >> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANKS. >> JOAN YORK DEER PARK RESIDENTS
GROUP. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING.
YOU HAVE 5 MINUTES. >> JUST LET ME CHECK THE MIC.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? >>YES.
>> OKAY. COUNCILLOR JAMES
PASTERNAK AND MEMBERS OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE MY NAME IS JOAN YORK AND I’M A MEMBER OF THE DEER
PARK RESIDENTS GROUP. OVER MANY YEARS OUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS
WALKED AND CROSS COUNTRY SKIED IN MANY OF TORONTO’S RAVINES.
IN 2013, I BECAME AWARE OF SAD STATE OF THE SURROUNDING RAVINE.
WHEN I MET A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO SHARED MY CONCERN, AND HAD BEEN
INVOLVED IN DOCUMENTING AND PHOTOGRAPHING THEM FOR MANY
YEARS. LOOKING OVER PAST CORRESPONDENCE WE HAVE BEEN HERE
MANY TIMES BEFORE. MY INVOLVEMENT STARTED IN 2015. IN 2016, THE PRESIDENTS OF THE
FIVE REPEATS GROUP — DRAWING HIS ATTENTION
TO THE STATE OF THE RAVINES AND THE URGENT NEED TO TAKE ACTION.
WE MADE DEPUTATIONS TO THE PARKS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE IN
2016. AND SEVERAL MEETINGS WITH OUR
LOCAL COUNCILLORS, A WALK THROUGH THE RAVINE WITH CITY
STAFF AND COUNCILLOR WONG-TAM. ON SEPTEMBER 25TH, 2017, THE
PRESIDENTS OF THE FIVE RESIDENTS GROUP AGAIN — [INAUDIBLE] AND
IN SEPTEMBER, 2016, MADE DEPUTATIONS TO THE EXECUTIVE. ON OCTOBER THE 2NDND, 2017, THE
CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THE RAVINE STRATEGY AND NOVEMBER 17TH
DEPUTATIONS TO PARKS AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE. NOW, ON
SEPTEMBER THE 9THTH WE ARE HERE AGAIN DEPUTING ON HALF IN SUPPORT OF
THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY TO BE CONSIDERED AT CITY COUNCIL ON
OCTOBER THE 2NDND. MUST BE DROWNING IN PAPERWORK. THE BIODIVERSITY REPORT IS AN
IMPORTANT DOCUMENT RECOGNIZING ITS IMPORTANCE TO A HEALTHY
CITY. IT HIGHLIGHTS THE CHALLENGES TO PROTECT HABITAT
THAT SUPPORTS BIODIVERSITY FROM FURTHER LOSS. TO RESTORE AND
ENHANCE DEGRADED NATURAL AREAS INCLUDING WATER AND SOILS THAT
ARE THE FOUNDATION OF HEALTHY ECHO SYSTEMS AND TO RAISE
AWARENESS ABOUT BIODIVERSITY AND WHY IT’S IMPORTANT. THESE ARE
ALSO THE AIMS OF THE MID-TOWN RAVINE GROUP. A MASTER PLAN FOR
THESE RAVINES WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL IN 2017. IT RECOGNIZES A LONG-TERM
PROJECT AND A COORDINATED EFFORT WILL BE BENEFICIAL. HOWEVER, AS
A DESIGNATED ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA, MANY PARTS OF
THE RAVINE CONTINUE TO DETERIORATE AND WE WOULD URGE
THE CITY TO TAKE A MORE AGGRESSIVE APPROACH TO
ERADICATING THE SPECIES BEING JAPANESE KNOTWEED AND DOG
STRANGLING VINE. THE GROUPS ARE WORKING HARD TO RAISE AWARENESS
THROUGH NEWS LETTERS. BY PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO
ENGAGE YOUNG PEOPLE WE INITIATED A PILOT PROJECT CALLED — WITH
FOUR SCHOOLS. FUNDED IN PART BY THE FACULTY OF FOREST STORY,
FIVE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, THE FOUNDATION AND PRIVATE DONORS.
THE EXCUSE ARE NOW EMBARKING ON A 2-YEAR OR 3-YEAR PROJECT IN
WHICH SEEDS FROM ALL GROWTH TREES ARE PLANTED AND SEED BOXES
AND NURTURED TO BE TRANSPLANTED INTO GARDENS, PARKS AND RAVINES
WHEN READY. THIS PROGRAM HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY BOTH STUDENTS
AND STAFF WHO ARE INCORPORATING THE SIGNS, STEWARDSHIP AND
ADVOCACY INTO THEIR CURRICULAR. THE PROGRAM HAS EXPANDED TO FOUR
MORE SCHOOLS PARTICIPATING AND APPROACHES ARE BEING MADE TO
EXPAND FURTHER. THE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL
LISTS OF THE FUTURE. I BELIEVE THAT THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY
IS ALSO A GOOD FIT FOR THE PRINCIPLES OF THE RAVINE
STRATEGY THAT PROTECT, INVEST, CONNECT, PARTNER AND CELEBRATE.
I’D JUST LIKE TO ADD ONE MORE THING TO MY SUBMISSION HERE, AND
THAT IS TO SAY UNTIL I MOVED AND JOINED THE LOCAL RAVINE GROUP,
AND HAD WALKED IN THE RAVINES FOR MANY YEARS, I WAS TOTALLY
UNAWARE OF JAPANESE KNOTWEED. I’VE BEEN ON A STEEP LEARNING
CURVE. >> IF YOU COULD WRAP UP, THAT
WOULD BE GREAT. >> PARDON?
>>YOU’RE AT YOUR TIME LIMIT IF YOU COULD WRAP UP, THAT WOULD BE
GREAT. >> I’M SORRY. I DIDN’T HEAR
THAT. OKAY. >> GREAT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANTS? COUNCILLOR COLLE.
>> [OFF MIC]. >> SINCE MY CHILDREN WERE YOUNG
NEARLY 60 YEARS. >> SO FOR 60 YEARS THEN IT
WASN’T UNTIL RECENTLY THAT YOU WERE MADE AWARE OF BECAUSE OF
YOUR WORK, VOLUNTEER WORK. >> ABSOLUTELY.
>>WITH THE RAVINE PROTECTION –>> MANY PEOPLE I THINK I
RECOGNIZE THIS IS SOMETHING HUGE AND BREWING BUT I DIDN’T KNOW
WHAT IT WAS. >>YEAH. SO I GUESS YOU’RE
PROBABLY TYPICAL OF SO MANY PEOPLE IN TORONTO THAT THEY WALK
BY THESE DANGEROUS INVASIVE SPECIES EVERY DAY. AND THEY
CAN’T IDENTIFY THEM BECAUSE THEY’VE NEVER HAD THAT AWARE
NECESSARIES. >> RIGHT.
>> FROM OUR DEPARTMENT WE LOOK OVER THE RAVINE AND MOST PEOPLE
SAY DOESN’T IT LOOK WONDERFUL DOESN’T IT LOOK GREAT.
[INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK.
THANK YOU. >>THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR COLLE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT? NO. OKAY. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. JULIE MICHALSKI. THANK YOU FOR COMING. YOU HAVE
FIVE MINUTES. >>I AM AN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
STUDENT AND I’M HERE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE NORWAY MAPLES IN
OUR TORONTO RAVINES. AN EXTREMELY DAMAGING INVASIVE TREE
SPECIES IS SPREADING RAPIDLY ACROSS OUR TORONTO RAVINES. IF
IT IS NOT EFFECTIVELY MANAGED IT WILL MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR OUR
OTHER NATIVE SPECIES TO SURVIVE AND COULD TURN OUR RAVINES INTO
WHAT IS KNOWN AS A GREEN DESERT WITH LITTLE TO NO BIODIVERSITY
COMPOSED OF ONLY THE SAME INVASIVE SPECIES. SO HOW DID WE
GET HERE. THE MAPLE WAS INTRODUCED TO CANADA IN THE
1700S AS A PLANTS BUT SINCE THEN IT HAS SPREAD RAPIDLY. IN 1977,
NON-NATIVE TREE COVER WAS JUST 10%. BY 2016, THIS NUMBER HAD
JUMP TODAY 40% AND IF NO ACTION IS TAKEN THIS NUMBER IS
PREDICTED TODAY JUMP TO 60% WITHIN THE NEXT 2 DECADES.
HERE’S WHAT MAKES THE NORWAY MAPLE SO DESTRUCTIVE. IT
PRODUCE AS LARGE CROP OF SEEDS THAT CAN SPREAD RAPIDLY ACROSS
OUR RAVINES. IT HAS AN EXTENSIVE SHALLOW ROOT SYSTEM
THAT OUTCOMPETES NATIVE PLANTS FOR WATER AND NIGHT PRE YACHTS.
AN THEY PRODUCE A DENSE COVER THAT BLOCKS LIGHT FROM GROUND
LEVEL MAKING IT I AM POSSIBLY FOR MOST OF OUR NATIVE SPECIES
TO GROW UNDER OR NEAR NORWAY MAPLES. THE RESULT IS AN
AGGRESSIVE INVADER THAT CREATES AN ENVIRONMENT THAT ONLY
SUPPORTS MORE LIFE OF OTHER NORWAY MAPLES. WE MUST TREAT IT
AS A TOP PRIORITY. AND TO THIS END A FEW KEY STEPS SHOULD BE
TAKEN. PROPOSED SOLUTION NUMBER 1, DEVELOP DEVELOP A MANAGEMENT
STRATEGY THAT FOCUSES DIRECTLY ON THE NORWAY MAPLE. ALL OF OUR
CURRENT STRATEGIES DO ADDRESS INVASIVE SPECIES, HOWEVER, NONE
OF THEM HAVE A MANAGEMENT STRATEGY SPECIFICALLY FOR THE
NORWAY MAPLE. THIS CURRENT TORONTO BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY
PRESENTED TODAY DOES HAVE A SMALL BLURB ON NORWAY MAPLE,
HOWEVER IT ENDS HERE. IDEALLY IN OUR UPCOMING IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN WE CAN HAVE A SEPARATE SECTION DEDICATED TO JUST NORWAY
MAPLE MIAMI. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO HAVE GENERAL ACTION PLANS
TOWARDS ALL INVASIVE SPECIES BECAUSE THERE ARE DIFFERENT
LEVELS OF PRIORITY AND THE NORWAY MAPLE IS ONE SPECIES THAT
REQUIRES ITS OWN ACTION PLAN IMMEDIATELY. PROPOSED SLOOUGS
NUMBER 2 ALLOW SMALL NORWAY MAPLE ON OUR RAVINE LAND TO BE
EASILY REMOVED WITHOUT A PERMIT. AND HERE’S WHY: THE STRATEGY
STATES THAT THE TECHNIQUE TO SAY MANAGE INVASIVE SPECIES ARE
RESOURCE INTENSIVE BUT HERE’S WHERE I DISAGREE THIS IS A HUGE
RESOURCE RIGHT UNDER OUR NOSES THAT WE’RE NOT TAKING ADVANTAGE
OF AND THOSE ARE TORONTO CITIZENS EAGER TO HELP. THERE
ARE 30,000 PRIVATE ADDRESSES ON RAVINE LAND WHICH POSES A HUGE
OPPORTUNITY TO GET HOMEOWNERS INVOLVED AT NO COST NOT TO
MENTION ALL THE OTHER TORONTO CITIZENS THAT ARE CONSTANTLY
USING RAVINES ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. HOWEVER THE TREASON
RAVINE LAND ARE PROTECT UNDER CHAPTER 6582 ACTION WHICH STATES
THAT TO REMOVE A STREET OF ANY SIZE ON RAVINE LAND IS ILLEGAL
UNLESS YOU HAVE A PERMIT. THE PROBABLY IS THE PROCESS TO APPLY
FOR AND OBTAIN A PERMIT IS COSTLY, IT’S COMPLICATED, IT’S
TIME-CONSUMING AND IT’S DISCOURAGING. YOU CAN SEE HERE
THAT JUST TO APPLY TO REMOVE ONE TREE REQUIRES EXTENSIVE
PAPERWORK AND COSTS A MINIMUM OF $117. THESE ARE ALL BARRIERS
THAT DISCOURAGE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP FROM OUR TORONTO
CITIZENS. HOWEVER, IF WE COULD REVISE THIS BYLAW, WE WOULD
ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. FOR EXAMPLE, LET’S
SAY I’M A PRIVATE HOMEOWNER OR A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT THAT’S
LOOKING TO GET MORE COMMUNITY HOURS. I WOULD BE ABLE TO GO
INTO THE RAVINES, IDENTIFY A SMALL NORWAY MAPLE AND REMOVE IT
EASILY AND QUICKLY WITHOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES. THAT WAY WE GET
THEM AT A SMALL SIZE BEFORE THEY DO TOO MUCH HARM. SO THE TAKE
HOME MESSAGES ARE THAT WE NEED TO MAKE THE NORWAY MAPLE A
PRIORITY BY DEVELOPING ITS OWN MANAGEMENT STRATEGY IN OUR
UPCOMING RAVINE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN THAT ACTUALLY ENCOURAGES
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP BY OUR TORONTO CITIZENS. AND IN ORDER
TO DO THIS WE CAN REVISE CHAPTER 658, 2 A OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
AND ALLOW SMALL NORWAY MAPLE TO BE EASILY REMOVED ON RAVINE LAND
WITHOUT A PERMIT. THANK YOU. >> WELL, THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT?
COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE, THEN COUNCILLOR COLLE.
>> THANK YOU FOR COMING IN AND GIVING THIS PRESENTATION TODAY.
SIMILAR TO THE QUESTIONS I ASKED EARLIER, WHAT SPECIFICALLY ARE
THEY OUTCOMPETING OR WHAT ECOLOGICAL FUNCTION IS BEING
HAMPERED BY HAVING THEM PRESENT IN OUR RAVINE SYSTEMS?
>>SO THEY HAVE LOTS OF DAMAGING IMPACTS P.M. SOME OF THEM ARE
HIGHLIGHT ON THIS SLIDE. BUT ONE OF THE THEIR MAIN PROBLEMS
IS THAT THEY CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT MUCH LIKE JAPANESE
KNOTWEED THAT’S ALL MONOCULTURE. SO WE’RE STARTING TO SEE MORE
AND MORE NORWAY MAPLE TO TAKE OVER AND NOT ALLOWING OUR NATIVE
SPECIES TO GROW NEAR OR UNDER THEM. IF YOU SEE A PLACE WITH
LOTS OF NORWAY MAPLE SOMETIMES YOU’LL FIND AROUND THE BASE OF
THE TREE THERE ARE NO OTHER SPECIES THAT ARE BASEBALL TO
GROW, IT’S BARE SOIL AND MUCH LIKE JAPANESE KNOTWEED WITH
THEIR ROOT SYSTEM IT CAN CONTRIBUTE TO SOIL EROSION AND
JUST CREATE AN UNHEALTHY RAVINE SYSTEM OVERALL.
>> AND DO WE HAVE OR DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT LIKE
HOW PERVASIVE THEY ARE? LIKE WHAT NUMBERS ARE WE LOOKING IN
THIS CITY RIGHT NOW OR IS THAT DATA STILL BEING GATHERED.
>> FROM THE TORONTO RAVINE STUDY HERE WE SEE JUST THESE STATS. THIS WAS THE
NON-NATIVE TREE COVER THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.
SO THEY’RE PREDICTING IN THE YEARS TO COME WE’RE GOING TO
HAVE 60% NON-NATIVE TREE COVER. SO THEY ARE SPREADING RAPIDLY
AND BECOMING AN INCREASING PROBLEM.
>>AND THE CITY HAS AN AMBITIOUS PLAN I THINK AND
STAFF CAN CORRECT ME LATER IF I’M WRONG I THINK IT’S 40%
CANOPY COVER BY 2040. WHAT DO YOU THINK WE SHOULD BE PLANT ING? WHAT HAS THE MOST
LIKELIHOOD OF OUTCOMPETING NORWAY MAPLE AND HOLDING ITS
GROUND? >>WE HAVE LOTS OF BENEFICIAL
NATIVE SPECIES HERE IN TORONTO. I AM NO FOREST EXPERT BUT I KNOW
THAT OUR SUGAR MAPLE TREE DOES GREAT IF OUR RAVINES. WE’RE
HOPING TO HAVE MORE OF THAT. PEOPLE CAN SOMETIMES CONFUSE IT
FOR THE NORWAY MAPLE. PART OF THE PROBLEM WE WERE TALKING
ABOUT THEY LOOK INTO THE RAVINES AND THINK WE HAVE LUSH BEAUTIFUL RAVINES WHEN REALLY THEY’RE
NORWAY MAPLE. >> THANK YOU.
>> COUNCILLOR COLLE. >> THANK YOU. DO YOU KNOW
WHETHER YOU CAN STILL PURCHASE NORWAY MAPLE SEEDLINGS THAT
GUARD — AT GARDEN STORES IN TORONTO.
>> I BELIEVE YOU CAN NOT. I’M NOT ENTIRELY SURE, BUT LAST I
KNEW THERE’S A BAN ON SELLING AND PLANTING NORWAY MAPLES. I
THINK ONE OF THE MAIN PROBLEMS IS THAT BECAUSE OF THEIR SEEDS
THAT CAN SPREAD SO RAPIDLY, EVEN IF THEY’RE NOT BEING PURCHASED
AND PLANTED, THE WIND IS BRINGING SEEDS ALL ACROSS THE
CITY. AND THEY’RE GERMINATING IN THE SOIL AND GROWING
EVERYWHERE, WHETHER PEOPLE REALIZE IT OR NOT.
>> SO I GUESS THE REAL COULD NUN DRUM AND SORT OF MAKING US
AWARE OF IT IS IS THAT ON OTHER HAND WE’VE GOT THESE GOALS OF
CANOPY COVER THAT WE HAVE TO MEET ON THE OTHER HAND WE’VE GOT
A LOT OF OUR CANOPY COVER NOW BEING PROVIDED BY THE NORWAY
MAPLE. SO WHAT DO WE DO TO TRY AND MANAGE THIS VERY, VERY
CHALLENGING, YOU KNOW, ISSUE? >> YEAH, THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT.
AND WE HAVE THIS GOAL OF CANOPY COVER, HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE IN
OUR BEST INTEREST TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT CANOPY ARE THE RIGHT
SPECIES THAT ARE BENEFICIAL TO OUR RAVINES.
>>OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
COUNCILLOR COLLE. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA.
>> YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE TO GET A PERMIT TO
REMOVE ONE OF THESE TREES. WHY DO YOU THINK THAT’S SO.
>> I THINK THAT THERE’S BEEN CONCERN IN THE PAST OF WANTING
TO MAKE SURE OUR CITIZENS DO THE RIGHT THING, AND THAT THEY ARE
REMOVING THE RIGHT TREE. SO PERHAPS A PERMIT PROCESS WAS
USED TO ENSURE THAT THE PEOPLE ARE TAKING THE TIME TO MAKE SURE
THAT THEY’RE PULLING THE RIGHT SPECIES. HOWEVER, BECAUSE IT’S
EXTREMELY COMPLICATED MOST PEOPLE EITHER CAN’T AFFORD TO
APPLY FOR ONE AND THEY’RE JUST DISCOURAGED ALTOGETHER. THERE
ARE ACTUALLY MY POWERPOINT’S GONE NOW BUT THERE ARE TONS OF
ONLINE RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO HELP YOU IDENTIFY
SPECIES ONLINE. AND SO I THINK WITHOUT A PERMIT PROCESS, IT’S
ACTUALLY QUITE EASY FOR OUR CITIZENS TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY
THEM PROPERLY AND DO THE RIGHT THING WITHOUT HAVING A PERMIT
PROCESS. >> SO IF — YOU’VE THOUGHT
ABOUT IT. SO HOW DO YOU MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU — IF YOU
ALLOWED A NON-PERMIT TIP SYSTEM TO REMOVE — I DON’T KNOW EVEN
KNOW IF THAT’S POSSIBLE BUT TO REMOVE ONE OF THESE TREES HOW
WOULD YOU ENSURE THAT A SUGAR MAPLE SUSPECT CUT DOWN INSTEAD
OF A NORWAY MAPLE? >>WELL, I THINK IT’S ALSO
MENTIONED IN OUR MOST RECENT BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY. THE CITY
PRIDES ITSELF ON ALL OF OUR MONITORING SYSTEMS THAT WE HAVE
OUT THERE. SO THERE ARE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDS THAT ARE
GOING OUT MONITORING OUR ARE CONVENES ENSURING THAT THE RIGHT
SPECIES ARE THERE. AND IF WE DID NOT HAVE A PERMIT PROCESS,
IT POSES HUGE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY GET THIS INVOLVED IN SO
MANY DIFFERENT AREAS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF THIS WAS ALLOWED, WE
COULD HAVE SCHOOL GROUPS THAT ARE GOING OUT TO REMOVE NORWAY
MAPLES THAT COULD BE ACCOMPANIED BY A VERY EXPERIENCED FOREST ECOLOGIST OR
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARD COULD BE THERE TO MONITOR THE STUDENTS TO
DO THE RIGHT THING FOR EXAMPLE, AND THEN ALSO COULD BE
CONTINUOUS MONITORING FROM THE CITY GOING THROUGH OUR RAVINES
AND MAKING SURE THAT — >> SO YOU’RE SUGGESTION IS —
YOUR SUGGESTION IS INSTEAD OF A FORMAL APPLICATION JUST KIND OF
LIKE INFORMAL OVERSIGHT. >> YEAH.
>> INFORMAL APPROVAL. >> YES. AND I WOULD ALSO MAKE
THE ARGUMENT THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE EAGER TO GO
OUT AND PRACTICE ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND WHO WANT TO GO
INTO OUR RAVINES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PULLING THE INVASIVE NORWAY
MAPLE WILL TAKE THE TIME AND EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY’RE
PULLING THE RIGHT SPECIES. SO I THINK PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO DO
THE RIGHT THING. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU,
COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG.
>> IN THE RAVINES RIGHT NOW I ACTUALLY WAS RECOUNTING A STORY
WHILE STAFF MEMBERS HERE PLANTED 20 YEARS AGO I THINK SOME BUTTER
NUT TREES AND ABOUT 10 YEARS LATER WHEN THERE WAS A PATH
GOING DOWN THE RAVINE, THE TRCH CHOPPED DOWN ALL THE
TREES AND USED IT AS A STAGING AREA FOR THEIR HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
AND THEN SO I ASKED: HOW IS IT THAT THEY CAN CHOP DOWN ALL
THESE TREES? AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE TRCA IS NOT REQUIRED TO GET
PERMITS TO TEAR DOWN TREES IN THE RAVINE.
IS THAT — ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE BYLAWS? ARE YOU —
>> I’M NOT SURE WHAT THE TRCA. >> TORONTO REGIONAL
CONSERVATION AUTHORITY. >> I’M NOT SURE WHAT THEY’RE
ALLOWED TO DO WITH THE PERMIT OR NOT, OR THE CITY, BUT WHAT WE
KNOW IS THAT TORONTO CITIZENS ON HIGH PRIVATE OR PUBLIC LAND FOR
RAVINE PROPERTY AREN’T ALLOWED TO REMOVE ANYTHING UNLESS THEY
HAVE A PERMIT. >> SO LIKE SECOND QUESTION IS
YOU SAY JUST ON THE RAVINE LANDS, WHY NOT ALLOW PEOPLE JUST
— IF NORWAYS ARE INVASIVE AND YOU KNOW, NOT A TREE THAT WE LIKE, WHY
WOULDN’T YOU JUST SORT OF AT LARGE ALLOW PEOPLE TO TAKE DOWN
NORWAY MAPLES IF WE DON’T LIKE THOSE TREES?
>> YEAH, THAT’S THE GOAL. THAT’S THE ULTIMATE GOAL JUST
BECAUSE OF THE TIME CONSTRAINTS OF THIS PRESENTATION, I WAS JUST
HIGHLIGHTING THE RAVINE LAND. WHICH IS PROTECTED AS A
SIGNIFICANT AREA BUT IDEALLY ACROSS THE WHOLE CITY WE COULD
HAVE NORWAY MAPLES ALLOWED TO BE PULLED WITHOUT A PERMIT SO THAT
IT’S EASY FOR EVERYBODY EVERYWHERE.
>> OKAY. THANKS. >> THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR
MINNAN-WONG. JUST VERY QUICKLY ON PAGE 30 THERE WAS A REFERENCE
TO THE NORWAY MAPLE STORY AND TALKS ABOUT MANY OF THE THEMES
THAT YOU’VE HIGHLIGHTED. IN THE ACTION PLAN THERE’S ACTION
NUMBER 2 WHICH IS DEVELOP ACTION PLANS FOR REGIONAL SPECIES OF
CONCERN AN ACTION ITEM 8 REVIEW POLICIES AND 3W5U8S FOR
OPPORTUNITIES TO SUPPORT BIODIVERSITY. DO YOU THINK
THOSE 2 ACTION PLANS AND STAFF WILL HAVE TO REPORT BACK TO
COMMITTEE COVER WHAT YOU’RE RECOMMENDING.
>> YES, I THINK WE FURTHER THOUGH FOR THE UPCOMING RAVINE
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WHICH I BELIEVE IS COMING OUT IN
NOVEMBER, IF WE COULD HAVE A NORWAY MAPLE STRATEGY IN THAT
DOCUMENT BECAUSE THAT WILL MAKE ACTION HAPPEN QUICKER. IT’S A
GREAT STARTING POINT WHAT WE HAVE IN THE TORONTO BIODIVERSITY
STRATEGY. HOWEVER, WE WANT TO STRAY AWAY FROM MAKING IT TOO
GENERAL. AND WE NEED A SPECIFIC NORWAY MAPLE PLAN.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PAUL, TORONTO RAVINE
REVITALIZATION STUDY. THANKS FOR COMING PAUL. YOU
HAVE 5 MINUTES. >> GOOD MORNING, COUNCILLORS.
I’M HERE TODAY WITH TERRY LANG WHO IS THE COORDINATOR FOR THE
TORONTO RAVINES REVITALIZATION STUDY. I SHOULD JUST TELL YOU
BEFORE I START THE BODY OF MY
PRESENTATION THAT BACK IN 1977, THIS WAS A SLIDE OUT PREVIOUS
PRESENTER DALE TAILOR AND I COMMISSIONED A STUDY OF ROSEDALE
RAVINES TO DO EXACTLY WHAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY, TO
INVENTORY LOTS, WHAT THE FOREST COVER IS, THE HEALTH OF THE
FOREST AND SO ON. WE DID THIS IN CORPORATION WITH THE HELP OF
UT. AND THEN WE FOUND THAT 10% OF THE FOREST COVER WAS INVASIVE
SPECIES. 40 YEARS LATER WE DECIDED THAT
THE STUDY NEEDED TO BE REFRESHED. SO WE COMMISSIONED
UT FORESTRY WHICH IS A VERY GOOD PARTNER AND WE DID THE EXACT
SAME PLOTS, 3 RAVINES AN WE FOUND THAT THE BASIS SPECIES COVER WAS
40%. SO AS WE TALK NOW THE INVASIVES ARE MARCHING
ALONG. THE NORWAY MAPLE TREES ARE FULL OF SEEDS WHICH WILL BE
RELEASED IN ANOTHER WEEK OR SO. AND THAT’S THE NEW GENERATION,
ANOTHER GENERATION OF TREES. THE TORONTO RAVINE
REVITALIZATION STUDY EMPLOYS STUDENTS EVERY YEAR AND
WE’VE BEEN DOING THIS SINCE 2015. WE WANT TO SUPPORT
STUDENTS. THEY DO GOOD FIELD WORK AND REFRESHED OUR STUDY
PUBLISHED IN 2018. I THINK MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN THIS. THE REPORT BEFORE YOU IS
EXCELLENT AND STAFF BE COMMENDED FOR ITS PRODUCTION. AND I WOULD
SAY TO YOU COUNCILLOR, THAT BELIEVE IT OR NOT IN TALKING
ABOUT THIS BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY, AND THEN IN NOVEMBER
BOTH RAVINE STRATEGY YOU’RE MAKING HISTORY. 15, 20 YEARS AGO YOU WOULDN’T
HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT TALKING ABOUT THIS. AND YOU HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY HERE TO REALLY CHANGE THE HISTORY OF TORONTO’S
RAVINES. AND TO SAVE THEM FROM TURNING TO ECOLOGICAL DESERT TO
SAY VERY FEW SPECIES AND ALL THE ISSUES THAT GO WITH THAT. YOU HAVE A LETTER THAT WE SENT
TO YOU FOR YOU. AND IN THAT LETTER WE ASKED THAT RECOMMENDATION 2 BE TWEAKED. SO
IT WOULD READ AND INCLUDE ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY MONITORING,
REPORTING AND IMPLEMENTATION AND BUDGETARY FRAMEWORK. AND THAT
IT REPORT BACK [INAUDIBLE] THIS WORKING GROUP. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS THAT
THESE ARE CONVENES, IF THEY WERE ON FIRE OUR APPROACH BE QUITE
DIFFERENT. TALKED BRIEFLY, GET ON WITH IT AND SAVE THEM WELL,
THE RAVINES ARE ON FIRE BUT IT’S A DIFFERENT KIND OF FIRE. AND
EVERY YEAR AS I SAID, THEY ADVANCE THEIR RANGE, THEY
ADVANCE THEIR GRIP. SO IF WE TALK ABOUT THIS FOR ANOTHER 3 OR
4 YEARS THE SITUATION WILL JUST BE WORSE AND WORSE AND HARDER
AND HARDER TO DEAL WITH. AND ALSO WE WANT TO START SEEING
SOME BUDGETARY RIGGER PUT INTO THIS.
WHAT’S IT’S GOING TO COST TO DO THE JOB? AND I THINK THAT
EVERYBODY TODAY HAS BASICALLY BEEN GIVING YOU THE SAME
MESSAGE. AND SO THE OTHER THING IS THAT
WE FIND THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND SO ON
AND THE DISCUSSION YOU HAVE A BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY ON ONE
HAND YOU HAVE THE RAVINE STRATEGY ON OTHER HAND AND
THERE’S QUITE A BIT OF OVERLAP THERE. AND WE WOULD ENCOURAGE
YOU AND STAFF TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO TRY AND SIMPLIFY THAT AND
MAKE IT A LITTLE LESS CONFUSING. AND THE OTHER THING IS JAPANESE
KNOTWEED THERE’S A — SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT EARLIER.
AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE
IS AN ENGLISH STUDY CALLED THE — REPORT WHICH LOOKED AT
STUDIED JAPANESE KNOTWOOD FOR FIVE YEARS AND WAYS TO ERADICATE
IT AND RECOMMEND A MULTI PRONGED APPROACH, DIGGING, CUTTING AND
USE OF HERBICIDES. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
ATTENTION. WE’RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU, PAUL. QUESTIONS
FOR THE DEPUTANT? NO. OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TERRY HOLME TORONTO —
>> WE’RE TOGETHER HERE. >>OH, SORRY. RIGHT. YOU’RE
TOGETHER. KAREN — THANK YOU FOR COMING YOU HAVE
5 MINUTES. >> THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY FOR
TORONTO. WE’RE COMMENTING ON BEHALF OF PROTECT NATURE TO A
COALITION OF OVER 20 NATURE AND STEWARDSHIP BASED ORGANIZATIONS
ADVOCATING FOR THE PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE AND NATURAL AREAS
ACROSS THE CITY OF TORONTO. LESLIE AND I ARE BOTH MEMBERS OF
THIS GROUP AND ALSO CO-CHAIRS OF THE HYDE PARK NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT COMMUNITY WHERE WE HAVE GAINED PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE
WITH MANY OF THE TOPICS ADDRESSED BY THE THIS STRATEGY
AND ALSO A LOT TO DO WITH INVASIVE SPECIES AND
RESTORATION. THERE IS MUCH TO APPLAUD IN THE TORONTO
BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE RESULT OF
EXTENSIVE CONSULTATION AN MANY ELEMENTS REFLECT THE FEEDBACK
THAT WAS RECEIVED. WHICH IS A TRIBUTE TO THE COLLABORATION
AMONG STAFF, EXPERT ADVISERS AND THE PUBLIC. THIS RECOGNIZES OUR
CITY’S STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES AS WELL AS THE
CHALLENGES THAT THREATEN OR NATURAL PLACES AND THE LIFE THEY
SUPPORT. IF — IT UNDERSCORES THE VALUE NATURE AS WELL AS THE
MANY WAYS IN WHICH WE BENEFIT FROM BIODIVERSITY. STRATEGY
PROVIDES A VISION OF HOW MUCH MORE CAN BE DONE. AND NEEDS TO
BE DONE TO PROTECT RESTORE AND ENHANCE BIODIVERSITY IN OUR
CITY. IT TRANSLATES GLOBAL CONCERNS SUCH AS CLIMATE CHANGE
INTO PRACTICAL LOCAL ACTIONS. ONE OF THE MANY IMPORTANT
FINDINGS OF THE CONSULTATION PROCESS IS THE GAPING DIVIDE
BETWEEN THOSE WHO ARE TUNED INTO THE NATURAL WORLD AND THOSE WHO
HAVE MINIMAL CONTACT WITH NATURE OR OUR AWARE OF IT ONLY AS A
BACK DROP. AND I WOULD SAY THAT THE DISCUSSION EARLIER ABOUT
JAPANESE KNOTWEED SHOWS SOME OF THIS DIVIDE THAT — WHERE
EDUCATION IS NEEDED. FOR TORONTO’S BIODIVERSITY TO BE
PROTECTED AND APPRECIATED IN THE LONG-TERM, THIS DIVIDE WILL NEED
TO BE BRIDGED THROUGH CONCERTED EFFORT RAISING AWARENESS WITHIN
THE CITY’S OWN STAFF AND RELATE AGENCIES INCLUDING AWARENESS OF
EXISTING LEGAL PROTECTIONS AND REGULATIONS IS A KEY STEP. FOSTERING MORE PUBLIC PROGRAMS
INCLUDING PAPERS IN STEWARDSHIP AND IN GUIDED NATURE WALKS. THESE AND MANY OTHER IMPORTANT
STEPS ARE INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION PLAN. SPECIFIC DEPARTMENTS ARE
IDENTIFIED AS BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR A LEAD ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING
THESE ACTIONS, WHILE OTHERS ARE IDENTIFIED AS PARTNERS. THIS IS
A SOUND APPROACH, A GREAT DEAL WESTBOUND ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH
COOPERATIVE EFFORTS, BUT ULTIMATELY THESE ACTIONS WILL
ONLY BE EFFECTIVE IF THEY ARE PROPERLY RESOURCED BOTH WITH
STAFF AND WITH FUNDING. ANOTHER ESSENTIAL COMPONENT IS
ACCOUNTABILITY. THIS INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE HERE
CAN PLAY A KEY ROLE IN REQUIRING REGULAR UPDATES FOR EACH OF THE
PROPOSED ACTIONS. WE URGE THE RELEVANT DEPARTMENTS
TO INCLUDE THE NECESSARY RESOURCES IN THEIR OPERATING
BUDGET REQUESTS STARTING WITH 2020, AND WE URGE COUNCIL TO
SUPPORT THESE REQUESTS EVEN IN THE FACE OF DIFFICULT FISCAL
CONDITIONS AND COMPETING PRIORITIES. WHEN IT COMES TO
ALLOCATING RESOURCES AND OTHER DECISIONS SUCH AS FINDING SPACE
FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF RECREATION OR SPACE FOR
DEVELOPMENT, THE CONSERVATION OF OUR PROTECTED AREAS NEEDS TO BE
SEEN AS ESSENTIAL AS A LEGAL AND SOCIAL LY RESPONSIBLE
COMMITMENT, NOT JUST ONE MORE NICE TO HAVE KIND OF THING TO BE
TRADED OFF UNDER PRESSURE. IN FACT, AS RECOGNIZED BY THE
STRATEGY, OUR NATURAL AREAS NEED TO BE NOT ONLY PROTECTED, BUT
EXPANDED THROUGH CONNECTING CORRIDORS AND BUFFER ZONES.
THIS ACTION IS PARTICULARLY WELCOME AND IT’S CONSISTENT WITH
THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT 2014, WHICH SPEAKS TO
CONNECTIVITY OF NATURAL FEATURES WHICH SHOULD BE MAINTAINED,
RESTORED OR IMPROVED. THIS BIODIVERSITY SETS —
STRATEGY SETS OUT A ROAD MAP FOR TORONTO TO STRENGTHEN IT’S
POSITION AS A WORLD LEADER, PLEASE DO YOUR PART TO ENSURE
THAT THIS STRATEGY IS ADOPTED AND IMPLEMENTED. THANK YOU. >> GREAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT. DEPUTY MAYOR MINNAN-WONG. >> SO I WAS CURIOUS YOU SAID WE
NEED TO SPEND THE NECESSARY MONEY TO GET ALL THESE THINGS
DONE. SO I’M CURIOUS, I WAS WONDERING IF YOU HAD A COMMENT,
IT SAYS THAT THIS WON’T COST ANYTHING IN
THE REPORT IT SAYS THERE ARE NO FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS RESULTING
FROM THIS REPORT. SO DO YOU THINK ALL THESE THINGS CAN BE
DONE WITHOUT SPENDING ANY MONEY?>>NO.
>> I THINK ONE OF THE SIMPLE ANSWERS IS THAT THIS IS NOT A —
THIS IS A REPORT THAT IS BUILT ON A LOT OF OTHER REPORTS THAT
HAVE GONE BEFORE >>SORRY, YOU SAID THE SIMPLE
ANSWER IS. >> THIS REPORT IS BUILT ON A
LOT OF OTHER WORK THAT HAS GONE BEFORE
>>YEAH. >> OFFICIAL PLAN, THE RAVINE
STRATEGY. >> YEAH.
>> A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE — I COMPARED THIS REPORT TO THE
RAVINE STRATEGY. AND A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE
ASKED FOR PARTICULARLY TO IMPLEMENT THE BIODIVERSITY
STRATEGY ARE ALREADY IN THE RAVINE STRATEGY. AND YOU MAY
REMEMBER THERE WAS A MOTION IN MARCH ON MARCH 9TH — EARLY
MARCH THIS YEAR REQUESTING THAT — THAT WHEN THE RAVINE STRATEGY
COMES FORWARD, THE — THE COST TO IMPLEMENT THE
FACTORS OF THE RAVINE STRATEGY BE CONSIDERED AT THAT TIME. SO
THIS — SO A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE’LL BE LOOKING TO GET
DONE ARE COMING TO YOU IN THE RAVINE STRATEGY. IS THAT —
>> SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THEN, YOU KNOW, THAT THIS CAN’T BE
DONE WITHIN EXISTING RESOURCE THIS HAS BEEN A — SIGNIFICANT
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS? >> NO, NOT SIGNIFICANT
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS. I THINK A LOT OF IT CAN BE DONE WITHIN
EXISTING AND IN FACT, THE STRATEGY GO OUT OF ITS WAY TO
IDENTIFY THINGS THAT STAFF CAN DO WITHIN EXISTING — WITHIN
EXISTING RESOURCES. BIG ONE IS THAT WE WOULD — THAT I LOOKED
THAT SEEMED TO ME NEEDED TO BE IDENTIFIED IS SUFFICIENT
RESOURCES TO REMOVE INVASIVE SPECIES. INVASIVE SPECIES
REMOVAL IS LABOUR INTENSIVE, IT IS — IT IS RELATIVELY
SPECIALIZED AND YOU HAVE THAT EXPERTISE IN URBAN FOREST STORY.
>> SORRY, I JUST HAVE FIVE MINUTES.
>> SORRY. >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU,
BUT REMOVAL OF THAT INVASIVE SPECIES, LET’S JUST TAKE THAT AS
AN EXAMPLE, THAT SEEMS THAT’S GOING TO TAKE A SIGNIFICANT
FINANCIAL COMMITMENT THAT I DON’T SEE THE EXISTING RESOURCE
WITHIN PARKS AND FOREST TEE STAFF.
>> I AM AN HYDE PARK STEWARD ONE OF
THE THINGS WE DO IS REMOVE THOSE INVASIVE SPECIES WHICH CAN BE
DOWN WITHOUT — WITHOUT MECHANIC — SORRY,
MACHINERY OR CHEMICALS. THINGS LIKE MUSTARD IS SOMETHING THAT
WE AS STEWARDS, BUT HYDE PARK IS A VERY, VERY SENSITIVE AREA AND
WE NEED TO DO THAT UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF FORESTRY STAFF.
YOU CAN LEVERAGE A LOT OF YOUR VOLUNTEERS WHO ARE SORT OF
RARING TO GO BY PROVIDING SUFFICIENT SUPERVISION FOR THEM
FOR US TO PULL A LOT OF INVASIVE SPECIES WITHIN OUR PARKS. BUT
YOU REALLY — IN MY OPINION, YOU REALLY DO NOT WANT TO SEND THE
PUBLIC IN TO JUST GO AND PULL THINGS BECAUSE THERE — YOU NEED
— WE AS VOLUNTEERS NEED ENOUGH SUPERVISION TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
PULL THE RIGHT PLANTS. >>OKAY. SO I JUST WANTED TO
ASK THIS — >> YEAH.
>> YOUR FRIEND. >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>>WHAT I WANTED TO ASK YOU, MA’AM, WAS WHEN I SAID THIS IS
GOING TO BE A — COST A LOT OF MONEY, YOU KNOW, YOU KIND OF
NODDED YOUR HEAD YES. SO I WANTED YOU TO — I WANTED TO
KNOW WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS WERE. >> SO I AGREE THIS IS A LOT OF
MULTIPLYING EFFECT. IF YOU CAN HAVE MORE STAFF TO PLAN AND
ORGANIZE AND SUPERVISE THE WORK, THERE’S ALL THAT MULTIPLYING
EFFECT OF GETTING THE COMMUNITY INVOLVED AS STEWARDS, BUT OUR
INVOLVEMENT IN HYDE PARK IS LIMITED BY THE AVAILABILITY
STAFF WHICH IS FINITE AND THE PARK IS A SOMEWHAT SPECIAL CASE.
A LOT OF THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS DO NOT EVEN
HAVE THE DEGREE OF MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT WE HAVE.
>>RIGHT. >>THEY DON’T HAVE THE RESOURCE
WORKING AT IT, THEY DON’T HAVE A LOCAL STEWARDSHIP GROUP THAT WE
HAVE. SO THERE’S MUCH MORE TO BE DONE.
>>OKAY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT? >>YEAH.
>> COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. >>YEAH, JUST TO PICK UP ON
THIS, YOU AGREE THOUGH THAT WE HAVE A QUALIFIED STAFF THAT CAN
FIGURE ALL OF THAT STUFF OUT FOR US, WHAT IT WOULD COST AND WHAT
OUR PRIORITIES MIGHT BE AND THEY COULD SET DOWN SOME FIRM NUMBERS
AN THEN WE PICK AND — AND WE SAY YAY OR NAY TO THOSE NUMBERS.
>> I THINK AS COUNCILLORS THEN YOU RECEIVE REPORTS FROM STAFF
AND YOU — AND YOU’VE PASSED THEM IN COUNCIL OR YOU DON’T
THAT’S — >> YEAH, SO YOU COME IN HERE
AND POINT SOMETHING OUT TO US AND THEN WE WITH THEM SORT OF
FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT WE’RE GOING TO RAISE TAXES TO DO IT OR
NOT, RIGHT? >>WELL, OR SHIFT PRIORITIES, I
MEAN THERE’S ALWAYS DIFFICULT DECISIONS TO BE MADE, WE
UNDERSTAND THAT. AS PAUL SAID EARLIER IF IT WAS ON FIRE AND
YOU COULD SEE IT BURNING YOU WOULD REACT. THIS IS A
DIFFERENT KIND OF DESTRUCTION BUT YOU KNOW AND ALSO WITH THE
AWARENESS THAT PEOPLE HAVE LIKE YOU CAN GO THROUGH OUR RAVINES
AND SAY OH THEY’RE ALL GREEN YOU DRIVE UP THE DON VALLEY IT LOOKS
ALL GREEN, YOU DON’T KNOW THAT’S ALL DOG STRANGLING VINE WHICH IS
CHOKING IT AND RUINING IT FOR HABITAT. SO IF WE ALL — IT
WILL COST RESOURCES AND I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT FOR STAFF TO KNOW
THAT THEY CAN ASK FOR — >> PERFECT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR,
PERRUZZA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT? THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. LESLIE GOODING.
>>THAT’S ME. >>THANK YOU. MID-TOWN RAVINES GROUP. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR
PASTERNAK. >> THANK YOU FOR COMING.
>> I’D LIKE TO — WE’VE SUBMITTED A LETTER WHICH IS
BASICALLY VERY MUCH ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT COUNCILLOR
MINNAN-WONG WAS JUST SAYING. THE — THIS IS A GREAT STRATEGY.
WE APPLAUD WHAT’S WRITTEN IN THE REPORT. IT SETS OUT SLEPT
GOALS, BUT THEY’RE NOT GOING TO BE MET IF THE CITY DOESN’T
COMMIT FUNDS TO SUPPORT AN ACTION PLAN THAT WILL ACTUALLY
DELIVER. LET ME JUST GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF JAPANESE KNOTWEED
IN THE RAVINE THAT WAS ON THE SLIDE THAT YOU SAW EARLIER.
CITY SPONSORED A COUPLE OF COMMUNITY DAYS WHICH COUNCILLOR
COLLE STRIKED ME AS ONE OF THE BEST WAYS IN WHICH TO RAISE
AWARENESS AND KNOWLEDGE BECAUSE THE CITY STAFF THAT WERE THERE
EDUCATED THE 25 OR 30 PEOPLE THAT CAME OUT TO EACH DAY AS TO
WHAT THE KNOTWEED WAS, HOW TO CUT IT, HOW TO DEAL WITH IT.
AND THEN FOLLOWED UP AFTER THAT EDUCATION PROGRAM WHICH HAD THE
AFFECT OF WEAKENING THE PLANTS WITH THEN HERBICIDE THAT KILLED
ACCOUNT WEAKENED PLANTS. SUCCESSFUL, SUCCESSFUL
INCREASING AWARENESS, SUCCESSFUL IN ACTUALLY DEALING WITH THE
LARGE STAND OF JAPANESE KNOTWEED, BUT THE ONLY ONE THAT
COULD BE DONE IN THAT YEAR AND THIS YEAR. THE
RESULT IS THAT WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY 45 OTHER PATCHES
IN THAT — IN THE PART OF THE RAVINE THAT EXTENDS FROM ST.
CLAIR DON’T TO MOUNT PLEASANT ROAD JUST OFF YONGE.
AND TO SAY THAT ONE PATCH ELIMINATED IS ENOUGH IS NOWHERE
NEAR REALISTIC. BIODIVERSITY IS A REALLY IMPORTANT CONCEPT.
THE — WHEN WE HAVE OUR RAVINES TAKEN OVER LARGELY BY ONE
SPECIES LIKE NORWAY MAPLES, WHAT A THAT OPENS US UP TO IS A
RAVINE THAT GETS DEFORRESTED AT SOME POINT WHEN NATURE EVOLVES
THE PREDATORS THAT WILL TAKE THAT SPECIES OUT. THAT’S WHAT
HAPPENED TO OUR ASH TREES IN THE RAVINES. ALMOST ALL THE ASH
TREES DIED. AND THE ONLY THING THAT SAVES THE RAVINE FROM
LOOKING DEVASTATED IS THE FACT THAT THE ASH TREES WERE ONLY A
SMALL NUMBER OF THE TREES IN THE RAVINE. HAVE MADE ALL THE TREES IN THE
RAVINE OR A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM 60% OF THE TREES NORWAY MAPLE
AND THEN WHEN NATURE DOES EVOLVE THAT PREDATOR YOU’RE GOING TO
HAVE RAVINES WITHOUT TREES. BIODIVERSITY REALLY IS
IMPORTANT. AND THE ONLY WAY THE CITY IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO
IMPLEMENT THE PLAN TO EFFECT A REALISTIC STRATEGY IS BY PUTTING
MONEY ON THE ABLE TO ACTUALLY DO THAT. SO I APPLAUD YOUR
QUESTION, COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG. THE PROBLEM WITH
THE CITY’S WE SEE IT, IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF STRATEGIES BEING
PRODUCED, BUT VERY LITTLE COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR ACTUALLY
IMPLEMENTING PLANTS. AND IT’S YOU. [INAUDIBLE] PROVIDING GOOD
ADVICE. BUT THEY’RE NOT GETTING THE FUNDS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO
DELIVER AN EFFECTIVE ACTION PLAN. THAT’S IT.
>> WELL, OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT.
COUNCILLOR COLLE. >> [OFF MIC] .
>> ABSOLUTELY. >> [OFF MIC] .
>> IT’S IN THE RAVINES AND THAT’S GOING TO TAKE TRAINED
PERSONNEL FROM THE CITY STAFF AND THEN DEPLOYING OTHER PEOPLE
TO ACTUALLY DO THE PULLING AND THE REPLANTING. SO IT’S REALLY
GOING TO COST QUITE A BIT OF MONEY TO HAVE THESE BOOTS IN THE
RAVINES >>THAT’S RIGHT. THE CITY STAFF
— BRINGING IN AND EDUCATING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO HELP IN
THIS. IT’S A LOT OF FREE LABOUR THAT WE WOULD ALL LIKE TO
PROVIDE TO HELP. BUT WE NEED CITY STAFF TO BE ABLE TO DIRECT
IT, LET’S FACE IT, I MEAN, I AGREE THAT KNOWLEDGE PEOPLE CAN
GO IN AND PULL OUT NORWAY MAPLES BUT MOST OF MY NEIGHBORS DON’T
KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NORWAY MAPLE AND A SUGAR MAPLE
A. AND IF THEY’RE TAKING OUT TREES THAT ARE MAPLE TREES
THEY’RE GOING TO BE TAKING OUT A LOT OF NATIVE SPECIES AS WELL AS
INVASIVE SPECIES. WE DO NEED THE INVOLVEMENT OF CITY STAFF
THAT ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE AND WE DO NEED PROGRAMS BETWEEN CITY STAFF
AND UT FORESTRY AND OTHER PEOPLE THAT ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE HELP
LEVER THIS. BUT THAT TAKES FUNDS. THE STAFF HAS TO BE
INCREASED OR WE’RE NOT GOING TO GET ANYWHERE ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU, JOHN. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE
DEPUTANT? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>THANK YOU. >> SUE AN AARON. >> [OFF MIC] THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I’M HERE
TO SUPPORT THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY WHICH —
PUT TO AS A VOLUNTEER AND I THINK IT’S RELATED TO OTHER
ITEMS YOU HAVE ON THE AGENDA WHICH IS THE ECOLOGICAL
INTEGRITY MONITORING AND THE NETWORK. I HAVE 20
YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE COMMUNITY STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM.
IMPROBABLE THE SECOND AND THE ONLY — THE LONGEST OF THE
SITES. SO WE HAVE MADE THAT AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT
AREA. AND THE OTHER BACKGROUND THAT I HAVE
I’VE DONE RECENTLY GRADUATE WORK IN THE DEPARTMENT — THE FACULTY
OF FORESTRY AT U OF T. I LOOK AT HOW THEY FAILED THE RAVINES.
AND I’VE LOOKED AT THE RAVINE REVITALIZATION STUDY IN
RELATIONSHIP TO I WANT GREATING COMMUNITY. AND WHAT I’VE FOUND
THROUGH ALL THOSE IS THAT IF THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY IS PASSED
AS IT STANDS IT WILL ALLOW US TO CONSIDER THE OVERALL MOST
IMPORTANT PLACEMENT OF BIODIVERSITY AS THE BASIS OF
LIFE IN THE CITY. I THINK IT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DO THAT
WHICH WE NEED IN LIGHT OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND JUST ALL THE
HEALTH AND ET CETERA THAT’S MENTIONED IN THE BIODIVERSITY
STRATEGY. BUT WHAT I WANTED TO LOOK AT TODAY ALSO WAS THAT
HAVING SEEN FIRST HAND AND CONSIDER THESE, I SEE SOME OF
THE FAILINGS OF OUR POLICIES, THAT THEY ARE NOT AND DO NEED
THE MONITORING VERY CLEARLY. WE KNOW, THE STEWARDS KNOW, THE
SCIENTISTS KNOW AND THE CITY DOES KNOW AND WHAT LITTLE
EFFORTS IT CAN DO, WHAT EFFORTS IT CAN DO THAT THE INVASIVE
PLANTS INCLUDING THE KNOTWEED AND SCIENTIFICALLY THROUGH THE
PROCESSES THAT ARE ALLOWED FOR, WILL DESTROY THE RAVINES. I’M
GOING TO STICK TO WHAT I’M READING HERE. IS THAT THE
POLICIES THAT WE HAVE NEED TO BE INTEGRATED FULLY. SO THE
BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY NEEDS TO BE DONE — YOU NEED MONEY FOR
IT. YOU HAVE TO USE THE STAFF AND THE STRATEGIES THAT ARE IN
EXISTENCE BUT AS WE’VE SEEN THESE STRATEGIES ARE SLOW TO
COME INTO PRACTICE. WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN IS THAT ALL THE
DEPARTMENTS A VARIETY OF DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO BE IN
DISCUSSION WITH EACH OTHER USING THE RELEVANT MONITORING KNOWING
WHAT GOES ON ON THE GROUND. SO YOU CAN’T JUST INTEGRATE
EXISTENT URBAN CULTURES, EVEN, YOU KNOW THE EXISTING BYLAWS ALL
OF THIS HAS TO BE INTEGRATED SO THAT THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY
HAS THE ABILITY TO PROTECT AND ENGAGE ACROSS THE RAVINES AND
INTO THE CITY’S GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE. SO WHAT I’M
ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT TODAY IS THAT THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY
BE ACKNOWLEDGED, BE FUNDED AND BE INTEGRATED MORE CLOSELY WITH
YET AN UNDERSTANDING OF STAFF AND COMMUNITY OF WHAT GOES ON,
THE VERY EXAMPLE OF THE STEWARDING PROGRAM BUT ALSO THE
EXAMPLE OF WHAT CURRENTLY IS BEING ALLOWED FOR IN THE ESAs.
IF IT’S AN UNDERSTANDING THAT IF UNDERTAKEN BY THE STRATEGY AND
THEN FUNDED IN — I AM NOT IN A POSITION AT
THIS POINT TO SPEAK TO THE THE FUNDING, BUT JUST THAT OUR
POSITIVES BUILT UPON THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY ARE GOING
TO GIVE US THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE NEED TO RESPOND TO
CLIMATE CHANGE AND TO CREATE AN UNDERLYING FOCUS OF BIODIVERSITY
IN THIS CITY FOR ALL OUR HEALTH. I COULD SPEAK TO A LOT MORE
DETAIL IF THAT’S — >> ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU FINISHED?
>>YEAH. >> OKAY. GREAT THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. QUESTIONS FOR THE DEPUTANT? . NO, OKAY. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENTS. OKAY. QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
HAVE FIVE QUESTIONS SO I’LL TRY AND TALK FAST. THE FIRST IS
TRCA IS LISTED AS A PARTNER IN MORE THAN TEN OF THE ACTIONS BUT
THE GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN SAYING THAT TRCA AND OUR AUTHORITIES
SHOULD ONLY BE ACTING WITHIN THEIR LEGAL MANDATES. SO COULD
YOU JUST MAYBE ELABORATE DO INVASIVE SPECIES FALL UNDER THAT
OR LIMIT TO FLOOD PROTECTION? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, WE’RE
STILL SEEKING CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
HAS MANAGEMENT BY OUR MANDATE LETTERS.
>> RIGHT NOW THOUGH YOU RECEIVE VERY LITTLE FUNDING FROM THE
PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT AND WORK THAT YOU DO IN THE CITY OF
TORONTO IS FUNDED ALMOST ENTIRELY BY THE CITY OF — SORRY
THE WORK YOU DO IN TORONTO IS ALMOST ENTIRELY FUNDED BY THE
CITY OF TORONTO. >>THAT IS CORRECT.
>>SO SHOULD THEY SAY THAT THIS IS NOT WITHIN THEIR MANDATE,
EVEN THOUGH WE ARE FOOTING THE BILL FOR THAT, DOES THAT ALLOW
US TO PROCEED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE TRCA.
>> IT DOES. IF A PROGRAM HAS BEEN INDICATE AS NON-CORE THEN
WE’RE PERMIT TO ENTER INTO A SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT TO
UNDERTAKE THOSE SERVICES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. MY SECOND
LINE OF QUESTIONING REVOLVES AROUND THE RAVINE STRATEGY WHICH
I’M EXTREMELY EXCITED IS COMING BACK TO US IN NOVEMBER. I’M
JUST WONDERING I KNOW THROUGH THAT YOU’VE DONE VERY EXTENSIVE
PRIORITIZATION OF OUR RAVINE SYSTEMS AND WHERE WE NEED TO ACT
FIRST AS THEY ARE THE MOST PRESSING. CAN YOU JUST SPEAK TO
HOW INVASIVE SPECIES WAS INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT THAT
HAVE PRIORITIZATION? >> THE — WITH THE FRAMEWORK
THAT IS IN THE RAVINE STRATEGY IT IS DETAILED IN THE STRATEGY
BUT BASICALLY WE LOOK AT HIGH QUALITY AREAS, AREAS THAT NEEDED
TO BE PROTECTED, THAT HAD SPECIES OF CONCERN AS WELL AS
OUR ESAs. SO THE INVASIVE SPECIES WASN’T IN PARTICULAR
INCLUDED IN THAT FRAMEWORK BUT THE THINGS THAT ARE OF THREAT OR
BY INVASIVE SPECIES WAS INCLUDED IN THAT FRAMEWORK.
>> OKAY AND THEN FOR THAT REPORT BACK THEN, WILL THAT ALSO
INCLUDE FUNDING REQUIREMENTS, SOME OF
THAT THAT WOULD BE DESIGNATED TO INVASIVE SPECIES WORK?
>>THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE REPORT WILL BE LOOKING AT A NUMBER OF
FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS RIGHT ACROSS THE BOARD. INVASIVE
SPECIES BEING PART OF A LARGER SORT OF FUNDING.
>>AN THEN SPECIFICALLY TO THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY THAT IS IN
FRONT OF US AND PEOPLE SPOKE TO IT EARLIER THAT IT DOESN’T
NECESSARILY HAVE NEW MONEY ATTRIBUTED TODAY IT BUT THESE
ACTIONS IS THE THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE A SCORE CARD WHERE WE COULD
BE REPORTING BACK ON A REGULAR BASIS ON THE STATUS OF THESE
ACTIONS? >> CERTAINLY WOULD BE
MONITORING AND WE WOULD UPDATE THE WEBSITE AN KEEP PEOPLE
INFORMED THROUGH THAT. AND ALSO THROUGH THE ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY
FRAMEWORK WE HAD SETUP A PROTOCOL FOR MONITORING.
>> SO THE ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK, WOULD THAT HAVE FOR EXAMPLE,
LIKE A SCHEDULE THAT WILL BREAK DOWN SOME OF THESE ACTIONS AND
THINGS INTO YOU KNOW, TIME LINES THAT WE COULD MAYBE HAVE SOME
ACCOUNTABILITY AROUND. >> YES, THROUGH THE CHAIR,
POTENTIALLY WE COULD DO THAT. >> AN THEN MY LAST QUESTIONS
ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC. SO THE FIRST IS ABOUT TREE
PERMITS BUILDING ON THE DEPUTATION THAT WE RECEIVED BY
MS. MICHALSKI. WHAT IS THE PROCESS
FOR UPDATING OUR TREE PERMIT SYSTEM AND WHEN COULD WE FEED A
REQUEST FOR STUDY LIKE THAT INTO THE PROCESS?
>>THROUGH THE CHAIR, YOU CAN ASK FOREST TEE STAFF. KEEPING
IN MIND THEIR 2 BYLAWS [INAUDIBLE] EACH OF WHICH HAVE
DIFFERENCE SPECIFICATIONS AROUND HOW AND THE CRITERIA AROUND TREE
REMOVAL. SO I THINK GIVEN THE DEPUTANT CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT
THAT WITHIN THE BYLAWS FOR THE NEXT TIME WE BRING THE BYLAWS
BACK FOR REVIEW WHICH WOULDN’T BE IMMEDIATELY BUT SOMETHING WE
CAN CONSIDER AND DANIEL CAN TAKE YOU THROUGH THE SPECIFICATIONS
IN THAT RIGHT NOW. >> SO THE FEES THAT WERE QUOTED
ON — IN ONE OF THE PRESENTATIONS RELATE BACK TO THE
CITY’S PRIVATE TREE BYLAWS AND CITY TREE PROTECTION BYLAWS.
THE RAVINE AND NATURAL FEATURE PROTECTION BYLAW DOES NOT
CURRENTLY HAVE ANY FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. IT’S
NECESSARY THAT THE PUBLIC GO THROUGH A PROCESS
FOR SOME OF THE REASONS ALSO MENTIONED DURING THE
PRESENTATION NAMELY BEING THE IDENTIFICATION AND PROPER
REMOVAL OF THE CORRECT SPECIES AS OPPOSED TO MORE DESIRABLE
NATIVE SPECIES. >> THANK YOU. AND THEN MY
FINAL QUESTION IS ABOUT GREEN ROOFS AND SIMILARLY, WHAT IS THE
PROCESS FOR UPDATING THAT? AND I ASK IN THE CONTEXT OF HOW DOES
IT OVERLAY WITH WHAT PROPOSED IN THIS BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY ON
ONE HAND, AND SECONDLY, I JUST DID A TOWER OF A ROOFTOP GARDEN
AND THEY WERE SAYING THAT THERE’S REQUIREMENTS FOR OVER
WINTERING THAT DOESN’T NECESSARILY FIT FOR AGRICULTURE.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT NEEDS MULL PEP U DATES — UPDATES.
>> YES, THROUGH THE CHAIR, WE ARE ON A [INAUDIBLE] WITH THE
REVIEW OF THE GREATER BYLAW IN 2020. AND WE WOULD ADDRESS
ISSUES LIKE MAKING SURE THAT URBAN AGO A CULTURE IS PERMITTED
AS PART OF THE PROCESS AND ALSO THAT WE LOOK FOR MORE ADDITIONAL
WAYS TO ENCOURAGE BIODIVERSITY. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>>THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR MCKELVIE. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF,
COUNCILLOR COLLE. >> [OFF MIC] ON YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY IS — WHAT’S THE FEE TO
REMOVE — TREE REMOVAL ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE FEE IS $117 AND CHANGE. FOR A
PRIVATELY OWNED TREE THAT’S GREATER THAN 30 SEPTEMBER METERS
IN DIAMETER. >>SO WHETHER IT’S A SILVER
MAPLE OR WHETHER IT’S AN SWIDLER MAPLE OR SPRUCE TREE, THE SAME
— THE — FEE EXISTS FOR THE INVASIVE SPECIES AS THE NATIVE
SPECIES. >>YES, THAT’S CORRECT. THE
ONLY ADDITION WOULD BE FOR TREES LOCATE WITHIN RAVINE AND NATURAL
FEATURE PROTECTION AREAS. IT’S A DEFINED LIMIT. THAT DOES NOT
HAVE A FEE ASSOCIATED WITH IT. >> SO WOULD IT BE FEASIBLE TO
CONSIDER PERHAPS A DISCOUNT OR SOME ENCOURAGEMENT AND NOT — OR
SOME WAY OF NOT TREATING THE INVASIVE SPECIES THE SAME WAY
YOU TREAT THE NATIVE SPECIES? IS THAT TOO COMPLICATED IN TERMS
OF — >>IT’S A COMPLICATE REVISION TO
THE BYLAW THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOME EXTENSIVE RESEARCH AND
THOUGHT ABOUT HOW THAT COULD BE PRESENTED JUST BECAUSE THE TYPES
OF, YOU KNOW, SUCH AS A NORWAY MAPLE THERE ARE MANY, MANY
MAPLES IN THE CITY THAT EVEN ARE QUITE BIG AND THE DEPUTANTS DID
ILLUSTRATE AND CREDIBILITY TO THE TREE CANOPY AND PROVIDE SOME
SUBSTANTIAL COVERAGE. SO IT’S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE COULD
LOOK AT IF DIRECTED, BUT AGAIN, IT WOULD BE VERY COMPLICATED [INAUDIBLE] TO UNDERTAKE IT IN
THAT WAY. >> YES. JUST IN TERMS OF
PEOPLE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED FOR RESOURCES. I KNOW RECENTLY WE
RECEIVED QUITE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ALONG THEIR OWN MONEY TO INVEST IN OUR SEWER
INFRASTRUCTURE, YOU KNOW, DOING THE MID-TOWN SEWER
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM I THINK IT’S $150 MILLION, 140 MILLION
AND THEN WET THE ONE IN BLACK CREEK, HOW MANY MILLION IS THAT? SO $220 MILLION INVESTED IN A
VERY NEEDED UPGRADE OF OUR SEWER SYSTEM. IT’S RELIEVE
CONTAMINATION OF OUR LAKE WATER AND TO RELIEVE BASEMENT NEEDING.
SO THAT’S BEEN, YOU KNOW, ALMOST $400 MILLION INVESTED IN THAT
JUST REPEATEDLY AND IT’S VERY NEEDED. AND AS YOU KNOW, OUR —
OUR RAVINES ARE ALSO NATURAL SEWERS. THAT IF IT WASN’T FOR
THE RAVINES YOU COULD IMAGINE THE NEEDING PROBLEMS WE WOULD
HAVE IN THIS CITY BECAUSE I THINK THEY COVER 20% OF OUR LAND
MASS. HAS THERE EVER BEEN ANY INFRASTRUCTURE MONEY INVESTED IN
MAINTAINING THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NATURAL SEWER SYSTEM, THAT IS
OUR RAVINES, HAS THERE EVER BEEN AN ALLOCATION OF CAPITAL DOLLARS
INTO THE PARKS BUDGET TO ENHANCE, PROTECT AND CONTINUE THE WORKING OF OUR
NATURAL SEWERS OR RAVINES?
>>THROUGH THE CHAIR, THROUGH TORONTO WATER FOR ALREADY MORE
THAN A DECADE WE HAVE RECEIVED SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS ANNUALLY
TOWARD PLANTING IN AREAS THAT ARE — THAT HAVE A LOT OF
PAVEMENT AND ASPHALT AND ROOF COVERAGE SUCH AS INDUSTRIAL
AREAS AND SLOPES WHERE THERE’S A LOT OF RUNOFF. AND SO FORESTRY
FOR YEARS HAS BEEN PLANTING ON SLOPES AND IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS
PARTICULARLY HIGH PAVEMENT AND ROOFTOP AREAS WITH RUNS FROM
WATER. >>THROUGH THE CHAIR, I’LL JUST
ADD A FEW MORE THINGS. YES, THERE’S A CONTRIBUTION ANNUALLY
OF $2 MILLION FOR TREE PLANTING IN RAVINES AND SITES THAT HELP
DEAL WITH STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND HELP RESTORE THE RAVINES.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE ARE SOME PROGRAMS, THE TORONTO
REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY HAS BEEN RUNNING THAT DEAL WITH
EROSION CONTROL THAT DID RECEIVE ALSO SOME DISASTER MITIGATION
ASSISTANCE FUNDING RELIEF FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. SO
THOSE PROGRAMS WERE ANNOUNCED AS WELL. SO THAT WILL BE HAPPENING
IN THE RIVER SHED IN PARTICULAR. IN ADDITION, TORONTO WATER HAS
MONEY THAT IT PUTS IN EVERY YEAR TO PROTECT RAVINES, TO PROTECT
THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IT OPERATES BUT WE HAVE A LOT OF
OUR INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN THE RAVINES. SO WE ALWAYS WHENEVER
WE’RE DOING WORK WE GO IN FIX OUR INFRASTRUCTURE BUT IT ALSO
IMPROVE THE HABITAT AND THE AREA THAT WE’RE DEALING WITH.
>> SO, AGAIN, JUST MENTIONED THESE 2 INVESTMENTS THIS YEAR OF
ALMOST $400 MILLION. HOW MANY MILLIONS HAVE WE RECEIVED FOR
NATURAL SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE THAT OUR RAVINES ARE
UNDERTAKING? HOW MANY MY I DON’T KNOW, 5, 10 MILLION WHAT
KIND OF INVESTMENT. >> LAST QUESTION WE’RE AT 5 AND
A HALF MINUTES. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, IF YOU’RE
ASKING, COUNCILLOR, AROUND EXTERNAL FUNDING.
>> YES. >>THERE HASN’T BEEN ANY EX TERM
FUNDING DIRECTLY BUT THERE HAS BEEN FUNDING TO TORONTO WATER.
>>WATER TO — >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> THAT IS CERTAINLY ASSISTED IN THE — IN WHAT YOU’RE
SPEAKING. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR COLLE. OTHER QUESTIONS FROM STAFF.
DEPUTY MAYOR MINNAN-WONG. >> YEAH, SO KIND OF ALLUDED TO
THIS IN THE QUESTIONS. SO I WAS SURPRISED THAT THIS IS ALL THESE
THINGS, THIS WHOLE REPORT ISN’T GOING TO COST — THERE ARE NO
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT? SOMEBODY.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, FINANCIAL I AM 34R5 INDICATIONS IS NOTE
WE’LL BE COMING BACK WITH THE RAVINE STRATEGY IN NOVEMBER
WHICH WILL HAVE SOME COSTS SOESHTD WITH SOME OF THOSE
RECOMMENDATIONS. WHAT WE HAVE DONE OUR BEST TO DO IS
INCORPORATE THE EXISTING WORK WE HAVE AN LET THIS STRATEGY GUIDE
AND HELP US PRIORITIZE THE WORK THAT WE DO WITHIN THE EXISTING
BUDGETS THAT WE HAVE. >> SO I’M GOING TO TRANSLATE
THAT. SO THERE ARE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS IMPLICATIONS?
>>THROUGH THE CHAIR, WE’RE NOT A — WE’RE NOT REQUESTING ANY
ADDITIONAL FUNDING THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF THIS REPORT.
>> ALL RIGHT. >> THERE ARE SOME VERY SPECIFIC
THINGS WE’RE LOOKING AT THAT CONNECT SPECIFICALLY TO THE
RAVINE STRATEGY THAT WILL BE INCORPORATE INTO THE RAVINE
STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT. >> SO THERE ARE NO FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS TO ADOPTING THIS REPORT. I’M GOING TO WORK THIS
ANSWER, MR. CHAIRMAN, BECAUSE I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT BECAUSE I’M
— I DON’T THINK ANYBODY CAN READ THROUGH THIS REPORT, MR.
CHAIRMAN, AND NOT BELIEVE THAT THERE AREN’T GOING TO BE
SUBSTANTIAL COSTS TO THE CITY, AND IT COMES FOR FREE. SO THERE
ARE DOWNSTREAM — SORRY — I APOLOGIZE FOR THE POND, BUT
DOWNSTREAM IF WE WERE TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT THESE
STRATEGIES THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT COSTS OR ARE YOU
SAYING THIS CAN ALL BE DONE WITHIN EXISTING BUDGETS? I
DON’T THINK IT’S AN UNFAIR QUESTION. BECAUSE WHEN YOU
ADOPT THE STRATEGY, YOU ADOPT THE WHOLE — I MEAN, YOU ARE BY
IMPLICATION, MR. CHAIRMAN, ADOPTING A WHOLE BUNCH OF
CONSEQUENCES AFTERWARD IF YOU WANT TO FOLLOW EVERYTHING THREW.
>> THERE’S A FOLLOW-UP FROM THE STAFF.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, FROM CITY PLANNING’S PERSPECTIVE I WOULD
SAY THAT THE INITIAL ADOPTION OF THE STRATEGY WILL HAVE NO
IMPACTS BECAUSE MOST OF THE WORK IS BEING CAPTURED WITHIN OUR
EXISTING WORK PROGRAM AND WORK THAT’S BEING UNDERTAKEN. AS
MORE DETAIL WORK PERHAPS EVOLVES, WE WILL REPORT OUT ON
THAT, AND IF THERE IS ANY INDIVIDUAL IMPACTS FROM A
FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE, WE WOULD BE REPORTING THAT TO COUNCIL.
>> SORRY, MR. CHAIRMAN, I’M SORRY I HAVE TO TAKE — OUT BUT
I DO. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTOOD BOTH ANSWERS AND THEY SAID
THERE’S NO INITIAL COSTS LIKE I HUNDRED PERCENT GET THAT, BUT
I’M TALKING DOWNSTREAM. AND MAYBE THIS — BECAUSE YOU KNOW
THE STAFF BEHIND ME MAYBE AREN’T UNDERSTANDING MY QUESTION.
MAYBE I’LL ASK THIS QUESTION OF THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER.
DOWNSTREAM IF WE WERE TO ADOPT THE STRATEGY BECAUSE WHEN YOU
ADOPT THE STRATEGY UNLESS YOU’RE JUST ADOPTING YOU’RE NOT GOING
TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH IT, WHY DO YOU DO IT AT ALL. IF WE
ADOPT AND EXECUTE THE STRATEGY TO GET YOU A THESE DOWN, TO GET
RID OF THE TREES TO IMPROVE OUR RAVINES, THERE’S GOING TO BE A
SIGNIFICANT PRICE TAG TO THAT, IS THERE NOT.
>> YES, THERE WILL BE. IN THE FOLLOW-UP IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
THERE WILL BE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH BEING ABLE TO UNDERTAKE
SOME OF THE STRATEGIC ACTIONS IDENTIFIED IN THE STRATEGY SO
JUST ADOPTING THE STRATEGY. SUBSEQUENT TO THAT THE PLAN WILL
HAVE COSTING ASSOCIATED WITH IT.>> OKAY. SO MY NEXT QUESTION
TO THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU THINK THAT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS
REPORT, AND I KNOW ONE DEPUTANT AN OLDER GENTLEMAN SAID THIS IS,
YOU KNOW, YOU’VE GOT TO PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS. I’M
KIND OF PARAPHRASING WHAT I THOUGHT ONE OF HIS MAIN THESE
WAS, DO YOU THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE SAYING IN THIS — IN THIS
REPORT THERE’S NO FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS, DO YOU THINK
THAT’S RESPONSIBLE? DO YOU THINK THAT’S REASONABLE? DO YOU
THINK WE SHOULD BE SAYING YOU KNOW WHILE WE ADOPT THE STRATEGY
THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE SIGNIFICANT — DO YOU THINK THAT
IS ACTUALLY A MORE LET’S SAY TRUTHFUL TRANSPARENT ACCOUNTABLE
THING TO SAY RATHER THAN SAYING YOU KNOW WHAT THIS IS A FREEBIE,
IT’S NOT — YOU KNOW WHAT, IT’S NOT GOING TO COST ANYTHING?
>>THROUGH YOU, MR. CHAIR, I THINK WHAT OUR FINANCIAL
IMPLICATION SECTION OF OUR REPORT DOES IS TALK ABOUT THE
SPECIFIC REPORT THAT’S IN FRONT OF YOU. SO BY ADOPTING THE
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE IN FRONT AND VERY SPECIFIC,
THAT’S JUST ENDORSE THE STRATEGY. AND SAY YOU THEN
DON’T IMPLEMENT ANY FUTURE PLANS OR ACTIONS, THEN THERE ARE
NO COSTS. SO THAT’S UNFORTUNATELY THE WAY WE
TYPICALLY WRITE A REPORT. THIS ONE IN FRONT OF YOU HAS NO
SPECIFIC FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OR EXTRA MONEYS ASKED FOR BY
COUNCIL. NOT SEEKING ADDITIONAL AUTHORITIES OR MONEYS, THAT
COULD HAPPEN LATER AS WE REPORT BACK, BUT WE NEED SOME DIRECTION
FROM COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL THAT THEY ACCEPT THE STRATEGY, THEY
LIKE THE DIRECTION THAT WE’RE HEADING. AND THEN WE CAN GO
BACK AND COST THOSE SPECIFIC PROGRAMS OR ANY AMENDMENTS THAT
ARE MADE BY COUNCIL. >> THE COSTING OF IMPLEMENTING
LIKE THESE STRATEGIES COULD ACTUALLY RUN IN THE TENS OF
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EASILY. >> THAT’S CORRECT.
>> OKAY. CAN I — YEAH, NO — >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> I’M GOING TO MOVE ONTO SOMETHING HE IS. SO MOST OF
THESE STRATEGIES, YOU KNOW, I REVIEWED MOST OF THEM. SO I —
SO I PUT THEM IN BUCKETS. SO MOST OF THE RECOMMEND DAYS I CAN
LOOK AT THE POLICY CHANGES THEIR TRAINING INITIATIVES AND THEIR
LEGISLATIVE CHANGES. BUT WITHIN THE CAPTURE OF THE STRATEGY
THERE AREN’T ACTUALLY REALLY ANY HARD DECISIONS THAT ACTUALLY,
YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE CITY GOING IN AND LET’S SAY DIGGING
UP THE WEEDS OR PULLING OUT THE TREES OR GOING INTO THE RAVINES
AND ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING THAT’S GOING TO MAKE IT BETTER.
THERE’S NOTHING IN HERE IN THIS REPORT IS THAT UNREASONABLE TO
SAY? AND MAYBE IF WILL IS MAYBE YOU CAN KIND OF .1 THING OUT FOR ME.
>>THROUGH THE CHAIR, I MEAN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
RECOMMENDATION IN THIS REPORT. KEEPING IN MIND THAT THIS REPORT
IS A CITY-WIDE REPORT. IT’S NOT JUST AROUND PARTS, FORESTRY AND
RECREATION. THERE’S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION AROUND THE RAVINES
AND HEALTH OF RAVINES. THERE ARE THERE ARE LARGER
RECOMMENDATION THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN FOR
EXAMPLE AND OTHERS THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENT AS REPORT GOES
FORWARD. I’M NOT SURE IF THAT’S ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
>> WE’RE WELL OVER FIVE MINUTES.
>> POLICY TRAINING AND LEGISLATIVE —
>> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS]. >> RECOMMENDATIONS OUTSIDE OF
THOSE. >> YOU WANT TO ASK FOR A SECOND
ROUND. >> OKAY, FAIR ENOUGH.
>> NO, YOU’RE GOOD. >> I’LL SAVE IT FOR COUNCIL.
>> OKAY. GREAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. I HAVE A
FEW. JUST FOLLOWING UP ON DEPUTY
MAYOR MINNAN-WONG’S COMMENTS ABOUT FUNDING. I’M GOING
THROUGH SORT OF DIVISIONS OR FORESTRY OR TRCA AND SOME
FEDERAL MONEY THAT WE’VE GOTTEN IN REPEAT TIMES. AND THEN LOOK
AT THE RAVINE STRATEGY AND THIS STRATEGY. AND COULD AN ARGUMENT
BE MADE THAT A FAIR AMOUNT OF THIS IS ALREADY
FUNDED? >>THROUGH THE CHAIR, I’M
SPEAKING JUST SPECIFICALLY TO THE PARKS FORESTRY AND
RECREATION ITEMS ON THIS AS THE REPORT ILLUSTRATES IT COINCIDES
WITH A LOT OF THE WORK THAT WE’RE ALREADY DOING ON RAVINE
MANAGEMENT, ON A NUMBER OF OTHER AREAS. BUT AS THE ACTING DEPUTY
CITY MANAGER HAS INDICATE, TO IMPLEMENT THIS REPORT, IT WOULD
REQUIRE US TO AS AN EXAMPLE IN THE RAVINE STRATEGY ADVANCE SOME
OF THOSE INVESTMENTS BEYOND THE POINT THAT WE — WHERE WE ARE
CURRENTLY. WE CAN CONTINUE ON THE WORK THAT WE’RE ALREADY
DOING. AND CAN CONTINUE IN THE SUCCESSES OF THE INVESTMENT OF
THAT WORK, BUT TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THE STRATEGY OVER TIME
IT WILL LIKELY WILL COST SOME ADDITIONAL FUNDING. AND AS I’VE
INDICATED IN THE RAVINE STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION COMING FORWARD IN
NOVEMBER SPECIFIC TO PF AND R AND THE REPORT WILL BE
ILLUSTRATING WHAT THOSE FUNDING IMPACT ARE.
>>YES, PARTIALLY FUNDED NOW THROUGH OTHER LINE ITEMS.
>>THAT’S CORRECT. >> OKAY.
>> APPROXIMATELY $10 MILLION AROUND OPERATING FUNDS IN THE
RAVINES ANNUALLY AND THE STRATEGIES IN THIS REPORT WILL
ALSO CONNECT WITH ALL OF THAT WORK THAT’S BEING DONE.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, FROM CITY PLANNINGS PERSPECTIVE THE
ACTIONS OUTLINED IN THE STRATEGY ARE INCORPORATED INTO OUR
EXISTING WORK PROGRAM. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. ON MORE TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THE
REPORT, I DIDN’T SEE AND CORRECT ME IF I’M WRONG, ANY KIND OF
RECOMMENDATIONS OR REFERENCES TO THE FEEDING OF WILDLIFE, ANIMAL
WILDLIFE WHICH IS AN INCREASING PROBLEM IN OUR CITY. AND ANY
KIND OF RESPONSE TO THAT, OR BYLAW RESPONSE.
>> WE CERTAINLY DID — THROUGH THE CHAIR, WE CERTAINLY DID
CONSULT WITH THE WIDE LIFE CENTER. AND WE DO HAVE UNDER
OUR COMMUNICATION ACTION AROUND ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF HUMAN
AND WILDLIFE CONFLICTS. >> SO IT’S AN EDUCATIONAL PIECE
IT’S NOT AN ENFORCEMENT PIECE AND THAT’S A SEGUE INTO MY NEXT
QUESTION. THERE IS A REFERENCE TO BYLAWS, I WILL SAY THAT BUT
NOT A LOT OF ENFORCE AM OF ANY KIND OF THE RECOMMEND DAYS DEPUTATIONS BRINGING
CONSEQUENCES IF SOME OF THESE ARE NOT — IF THEY’RE VIOLATED
IN SOME WAY LIKE DRAINING A SWIMMING POOL INTO A SENSITIVE DIODIVERSE AREA.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, YOU KNOW IN MANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS
THEY’RE NOT — THE ACTIONS ARE NOT SO MUCH IN ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS. MANY OF THEM ARE COMMUNICATION ACTIONS, EDUCATION
ACTIONS, VOLUNTARYISM, ADVANCING VOLUNTEERISM IN A NUMBER OF
AREAS AND MANY RECOMMENDATION ARE ALREADY INCLUDED IN SOME
EXISTING BYLAWS THAT ARE ENFORCEABLE. ON OUR END THAT’S
WHERE MANY OF THE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS WOULD COME INTO THE
EXISTING BYLAWS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. FINALLY,
THERE’S A REFERENCE I GUESS ON PAGE 18, I SEE THIS REPORT IS
CO-SIGNED BY PLANNING. I REPRESENT THE DOWNS VIEW PARK
AREA AND RIGHT NOW ON MY DESK IS A PLANNING PROPOSAL FOR 6,500
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 1.6 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE,
AND 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND THAT’S BOTH IN THE
WILLIAM AND BAKER AND ALLEN DISTRICT AREAS. YET I SEE HERE
REFERENCE [INAUDIBLE] BEING AN OPPORTUNITY — [INAUDIBLE]
WHAT PLANNING IS DOING AND THE PHILOSOPHY OF THIS REPORT AND I
SEE THAT I’M — WELL TO PUT IT MILDLY ON 2 DIFFERENT PLANETS. >> IT’S SOMETHING WE’VE BEEN
DOING– THROUGH THE CHAIR, IN OUR REPEAT SECONDARY MANS WE’VE
INCLUDED POLICY SPECIFIC TO BIODIVERSITY TO ENCOURAGING
THEM. AND THE SAME FOR DOWNS VIEW.
>>ALL RIGHT. WE’LL LEAVE THE REST OF IT FOR COUNCIL.
>> [OFF MIC]. >> SORRY.
>> OKAY. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. >> I JUST WANT TO — COUNCILLOR
COLLE TOUCHED ON THIS, I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS WHOLE
MOTION OF PERMITS AND BETTER UNDERSTANDING HOW SOMEONE IS
ABLE TO REMOVE A TREE IN THE RAVINE. SO YOU INTO HE HAD A
PERMIT FOR EVEN — EVEN REMOVING LIKE A LITTLE TREE?
>>THROUGH THE CHAIR, THERE’S NO SIZE LIMITS IN THE RE CONVENE
AND NATURAL FEATURE PROTECTION BYLAW THAT DIFFERS FROM THE
PRIVATE TREE BYLAW WHERE THERE’S A 30 SEPTEMBER METER SIZE.
>> QUEUE EXPLAIN THAT IN A WAY THAT I COULD UNDERSTAND?
>>SO ANY — UNDER THE CURRENT RAVINE AND NATURAL FEATURE
PROTECTION BYLAW ALL WOODEN SPECIES ARE PROTECTED.
>> I GOT A 4-YEAR OLD WHO SAYS TO ME, DAD DON’T SAY MAYBE JUST
SAY YES OR NO. ALL RIGHT. SO CAN YOU PULL OUT A LITTLE TWIG
OF A TREE IN A RAVINE WITHOUT A PERMIT?
>>TECHNICALLY A PERMIT IS REQUIRED TO REMOVE ANY
VEGETATION FROM THE RAVINE AND NATURAL FEATURE PROTECTION
SYSTEM. >> SO IF I’M GOING TO PULL OUT
A TWIG OF A TREE I NEED TO GO AND GET A PERMIT, CORRECT?
>>YES. >>OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THAT’S
IN ALL CASES WITHOUT EXCEPTION. >> NO, THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS
ASSOCIATED WITH PERMITTING. A TREE THAT IS DEAD FOR EXAMPLE,
OR A TREE THAT’S HAZARDOUS OR A TREE THAT IS DECEASED IN SOME
WAY THEY DID NOT REQUIRE A PERMIT.
>> SO MAKES THAT DETERMINATION?>>THE DETERMINATION IS MADE BY
URBAN FORESTRY WHEN THE REQUEST IS MADE THROUGH OUR SECTION.
>> OKAY. SO — SO IN THAT CASE YOU GO OUT, INSPECT AND IF YOU
DETERMINE THE TREE CAN BE REMOVED YOU CAN JUST SIMPLY SAY
I’LL TAKE DOWN? >>WELL, NO, THIS IS A FORM
THAT’S GIVEN THAT OFFICIALLY EXEMPTS THE TREE FROM THE BYLAW.
>>SO IF I HAVE A SCHOOL GROUP LET’S SAY HYPOTHETICALLY WANTING
TO GO INTO THE RAVINE AND DO SOME SORT OF — REMOVING SOME OF
THESE WHAT WE WOULD CALL — WHAT WE HAVE DETERMINED TO BE
INVASIVE SPECIES THAT ARE DAMAGING OUR RAVINE SYSTEM, THEY
WOULDN’T — WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO WHAT WINK FROM YOU OR A NOD
FROM FORESTRY REMOVE THOSE TREES WITHOUT A PERMIT.
>> URBAN FORESTRY CURRENTLY HAS A VERY ACTIVE VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
WHERE WE TAKE VOLUNTEERS INTO THE RAVINES TO DO A VARIETY OF
RESTORATION WORK. WE ALSO HAVE A COMMUNITY STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM
AND SOME OF THE VOLUNTEERS ARE HERE TODAY THAT COME ON A
REGULAR BASIS. THOSE — THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY INVASIVE
SPECIES MANAGEMENT NEEDS TO BE UNDER DONE UNDER SUPERVISION AND
DIRECTION OF STAFF BECAUSE OF THE OTHER IMPLICATIONS IT COULD
HAVE SUCH AS MAKING SURE THAT THEY’RE PULLING THE RIGHT
SPECIES AND NOT TRAMPLING NATIVE SENSITIVE HABITAT IN THAT AREA.
SO WE ADOPT CURRENTLY ALLOW GROUPS TO GO IN ON THEIR OWN BUT
ARE DONE THROUGH OUR PROGRAMS UNDER SUPERVISION OF STAFF.
>>SO WITH YOUR STAFF A GROUP CAN GO INTO THE RAVINE AND WITH
STAFF APPROVAL REMOVE TREES THAT ARE DETERMINED TO BE INVASIVE TO REMOVE.
>> THAT’S CORRECT WITH STAFF APPROVAL AND SUPERVISION.
>> STAFF APPROVAL AND SUPERVISION, OKAY. I GUESS
BECAUSE I DON’T UNDERSTAND THIS VERY WELL. WOULD STAFF BE OKAY
WITH BRINGING FORWARD A REPORT THAT EXPLAINS THIS TO US FOR TO
US TAKE A LOOK AT HOW WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR
PEOPLE WHO WANT TO HELP US DO THIS WORK, DO IT WITHOUT YOU
KNOW, WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, THE HINDRANCES OF EXPERIENCE SIEVE
EXPERIMENTS AND TIME DELAYS AND ALL THOSE OTHER — WOULD YOU BE
OKAY WITH THAT. >> SO THROUGH THE CHAIR, I MEAN
BYLAWS ARE VERY SPECIFIC AROUND ALLOWANCES AND WHO CAN DO WHAT.
SO YOU’RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT REVIEW OF THE BYLAWS CASE WHICH
STAFF WOULDN’T BE SUPPORTIVE OF REVIEW OF THE BYLAW SPECIFIC TO
VOLUNTEERISM AND DEPUTY STEWARDSHIP GROUPS. I THINK AS
WE’VE INDICATED, THIS IS A LOT OF ACTIVITIES THAT CURRENT
HAPPEN WITH STEWARDSHIP GROUPS AND WE ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF
THAT GROUP AND THANKFUL FOR HELP THAT WE GET FROM COMMUNITY IN
IMPLEMENTING SOME OF THOSE PROGRAMS. IF YOU WANT TO REPORT
BACK ON WHAT THOSE PROGRAMS ARE AND HOW WE MANAGE THEM I THINK
WE’D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. IF THAT’S THE — [INAUDIBLE].
>> THAT WAS YOUR LAST QUESTION.>> YEAH, ESSENTIALLY THAT WOULD
BE MY REQUEST, YEAH. >> SPEAKERS. COUNCILLOR
MCKELVIE. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
WANTED TO START BY THANKING STAFF FOR THIS WORK. I WAS
SPEAKING WITH THEM LAST WEEK AND REALLY WANT TO HIGHLIGHT
EVERYBODY THAT — I DON’T THINK THEY’RE DOING THIS JUST FOR WORK
BUT TRULY ARE COMMITTED TO THE PRINCIPLES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN
THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY SO I THANK THEM FOR THAT AS WELL AS
THE VERY USEFUL EXPLANATIONS ABOUT WHAT ECOLOGICAL INTEGRITY
MEANS IN AN URBAN VERSUS A RURAL OR NORTHERN SETTING. SO THAT
WAS VERY HELPFUL. SOMETHING I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT VERY
CLEARLY TO EVERYBODY IS THAT HIDDEN WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT
THERE IS A VALUATION OF WHAT OUR ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS ARE FOR OUR
RAVINES. SO THE ECOSYSTEM SERVICE THAT IS THEY PROVIDE IS
822 MILLION ANNUALLY. AND THAT IS A HUGE NUMBER AND IT
BASICALLY REPRESENTS YOU KNOW WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF MONEY WE
WOULD HAVE TO SPEND FOR THESE FUNCTIONS IF THESE RAVINES
WEREN’T THERE. SO WHILE I AM MINDFUL THAT THESE STRATEGIES
AND ACTIONS DO REQUIRE MONEY, THE MONEY THAT WE INVEST WILL
HAVE A HUGE RETURN ON INVESTMENT IF IT MEANS THAT CAN MAINTAIN
THOSE ECOSYSTEM SERVICES TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY. AND
FINALLY I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THERE IS HUGE PUBLIC INTEREST
AROUND INVASIVE SPECIES RIGHT NOW. AND IT’S CERTAINLY
SOMETHING THAT I’VE RECEIVED THE MOST ENGAGEMENT WITH ON SOCIAL
MEDIA AS THE TOPIC AS WE PUT OUT INFORMATION TO THE COMMUNITY.
THEY’RE ALWAYS INTERESTED TO HEAR ABOUT ACTIONS THAT ARE
BEING TAKEN IN THE NEIGHBOURHOOD ABOUT ANY OF THE OTHER SPECIES
AND RECEIVING HUGE UPTICK. SO I THINK THE COMMUNITIES ARE
INTERESTED. THEY WANT THIS SORT OF ACTIVITY TO HAPPEN. THEY
WANT TO FIGHT INVASIVE SPECIES AND AS MANY OF THE DEPUTANTS
POINTED OUT THEY’D ALSO LIKE TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION. AND
THEY ARE LOOKING FOR WAYS THAT THEY CAN ENGAGE AND THEY CAN
PARTICIPATE IN REMOVAL OF INVASIVE SPECIES FROM THEIR
COMMUNITIES. I REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO THE RAVINE STRATEGY
IN NOVEMBER AND IN PARTICULAR HOW IT WILL ADDRESS NOT JUST,
YOU KNOW, FLOOD PROTECTION AND ALL THOSE OTHER SERVICES THAT
ARE PROVIDED, BUT ALSO AS WE GO INTO OUR RAVINES TO UPGRADE AND
INVEST IN THEM THAT WE ARE ALSO AT THE SAME TIME STRATEGICALLY
TARGETING INVASIVE SPECIES SO I REALLY LOOK FORWARD TO THAT
REPORT. AND I HOPE THOSE OF YOU ESPECIALLY THE YOUNG STUDENTS
THAT CAME OUT TO GIVE DEPUTATIONS TODAY WILL COME BACK
IN NOVEMBER TO GIVE US IMPORTANT FEEDBACK ON THOSE SUBJECTS THEN
AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR
MCKELVIE. COUNCILLOR LAYTON. >> YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
HAVE SEVERAL MOTIONS, MOTION 1 THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND
ENVIRONMENT COMMIT REQUEST THE GENERAL MANAGER RECREATION CHIEF
PLANNER, CITY PLANNING AND GENERAL MANAGER TORONTO WATER
REPORT BACK TO THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT
COMMITTEE THREE THE REPORT NOVEMBER 2019. [READING] NUMBER 2, WHAT’S UP WITH NUMBER
2, THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REQUESTS
THE APPROPRIATE STAFF TO CONSIDER PRIOR OR ADVERTISING AS
PART OF THE INVASIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN THE 4 REGULATED SPECIES
INCLUDING JAPANESE KNOTWEED AND FINALLY THAT RECOMMENDATION 2 BE
AMEND AS FOLLOWS: CITY COUNCIL DIRECT THE GENERAL MANAGER —
JUST THIS ADDS THE HIGHLIGHTED PORTION INCLUDING IMPLEMENTATION
AND BUDGETARY FRAMEWORK. I’D LIKE TO THANK STAFF FOR THE
REPORT. AND HIGH LIGHT THERE ARE — THEY ARE 3 THINGS THAT I
REALLY LOVE ABOUT THIS — ABOUT THIS POLICY IN FRONT OF US. ONE
AND I’LL GET TO IT IS A NEAT STORY, A NEAT PERSONAL STORY,
TWO, THAT IT INVOLVES SOMETHING THAT ALL OF US CARE ABOUT AND
THAT IS THE HEALTH OF OUR CITY, THE PHYSICAL HEALTH THE
ECOSYSTEM HEALTH AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE HEALTH OF OUR
CITY. AND FINALLY IT GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY AS COUNCILLORS TO
SHOW OUR COMMITMENT FOR SOMETHING. AND I’LL GET TO THAT
IN A SECOND. SO FIRST I WANT TO TELL YOU A STORY. SO THIS —
THE BIODIVERSITY STRATEGY CAME FROM A LETTER THAT I WROTE IN
2015, AND PUT ON THE AGENDA AND IT WAS ONLY ON THIS AGENDA FOR 2
REASONS. I HAD A MEETING WITH AN OLD FRIEND LESLIE ADAMS FROM
— WHICH SOMEONE WILL REMEMBER IT’S LIKE PEOPLE FOR OUR WATER
AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES. THEY’VE BEEN DOING FIGHTS IN THE
PROVE VICTIMS FOR YEARS. AND SHE TOLD ME THAT 2011 AND 2020
WAS THE UN DECADE OF BIODIVERSITY. BIG UN
DECLARATION THE PREVIOUS PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT DID SOME
WORKS ON IT. BUT CITIES HADN’T DONE ANYTHING. AND YET WE HAVE
A LOT OF ECOLOGICAL RESOURCE IN OUR CITY. WE HAVE A LOT OF
BIODIVERSITY. BUT CITIES IN THE PROVINCE AND ACROSS COUNTRY
WEREN’T DEVELOPING PLANS AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS A LITTLE SILLY.
LATER ON THAT WEEK ACTUALLY AID CONVERSATION WITH MY PARTNER AND
SHE IS AN AVID BIRDER AND SHE TOWED ME ABOUT A CHIMNEY COMING
DOWN ACTUALLY ACROSS TOWN BUT THAT WAS NEW TO AN ENDANGERED
SPECIES AND SHE ASKED ME WHAT WOULD THE CITY DO, I SAID THIS
IS NO DIVISION THAT CHECKS FOR THIS THING SO WE WOULD ISSUE A
DEMOLITION PERMIT BUT WE HAVE NO ONE THAT ACTUALLY CHECKS THAT
BOX THAT SAYS NO YOU’RE NOT DESTROYING ENDANGERED SPECIES
HABITAT. AND IT STRUCK ME THAT SOMEONE ALONG THE WAY AT THE
CITY COULD ACTUALLY SERVE THAT PURPOSE TO CHECK THAT BOX THAT
SAYS THIS IS ON A HUNDRED YEAR OLD CHIMNEY VERY LIKELY
ENDANGERED SPECIES HABITAT. SO YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE
DOCUMENTATION. WE DO THAT FOR A LOT OF OTHER THINGS. AT THE
SAME POINT IN TIME THE — WERE REESTABLISHING ON TORONTO
ISLANDS. AND THEN MORE RECENTLY I HAD — I GOT TO LEARN FROM
SOME OF THE SPEAKERS HERE ABOUT SOME OF THE INVASIVES IN OUR
RAVINE SYSTEM. SO THIS IS A REALLY HE CAN
SITING STRATEGY BECAUSE IT DOES TOUCH ON SOMETHING THAT I THINK
A LOT OF US — AND WE HEARD FROM COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG IT’S
SOMETHING THAT HE HAS JUST IN HIS OWN BACKYARD. THAT THIS IS
ABOUT THE HEALTH OF OUR CITY, OUR PHYSICAL HEALTH BECAUSE OF
— THE IMPACT THAT SOME INVASIVE SPECIES CAN HAVE ON OUR PHYSICAL
HEALTH, OUR ECOSYSTEM HEALTH BECAUSE THAT HABITAT —
THE SPECIES BIODIVERSITY ADDS TO THE COMPLEXITY OF AND THEREFORE
HEALTH OF THE ENVIRONMENT AROUND US. AND FINALLY OUR
INFRASTRUCTURE HEALTH. I GOT THE PRIVILEGE OF A TOUR WITH
FOLKS FROM THE RAVINE GROUP JUST TO SEE THE DEVASTATION THAT IS
HAPPENING WITHIN OUR RAVINE SYSTEM AS A RESULT OF SOME OF
THESE INVASIVES AND IT IS GOING TO COST US MONEY. COUNCILLOR
MINNAN-WONG IS QUITE RIGHT TO SAY THAT IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS
REPORT IF WE DO IT IS GOING TO COST MONEY. IT’S YOU FEEL NOT
PRESENTED HERE BECAUSE THOSE MONEY ASKS WOULD BE UNDER THE
RAVINE STRATEGY WOULD BE UNDER A STRATEGIES FOR INVASIVE SPECIES
SPECIFICALLY. SO HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE KNOTWEED IN A
COORDINATED FASHION, HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE INASIVE NORWAY MAPLE
IN AN APPROPRIATE FASHION. IT IS GOING TO COST MONEY. IT’S
JUST THE MONEY THE DOLLAR VALUES AREN’T HERE IN FRONT OF US YET.
THAT’S WHY MOST OF MY ITEMS DON’T SAY SPEND MORE MONEY ON
IT, IT IS AS THE PROCESS OF THE RAVINE STRATEGY AND BUDGETS COME
IN PROPOSALS. LIKE I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH COUNCILLOR
MINNAN-WONG IN THAT THERE ARE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS.
WHERE WE MIGHT DISAGREE IS I ACTUALLY THINK WE SHOULD FUND
PROGRAMS THAT REALLY DO ADDRESS THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS
REPORT SO THAT WE SEE ADVANCEMENT IN PROTECTION OF OUR
— OF OUR RAVINES AND BIODIVERSITY. WE NEED TO PUT
RESOURCE INTO THIS. UNFORTUNATELY THE ONLY EXAMPLE
WE HAVE OF THE LAST TIME CITY COUNCIL HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO
DEMONSTRATE OUR COMMITMENT TO THIS WAS FOR A TINY HALF MILLION
DOLLARS ASK TO CLEAN UP GARBAGE AND LITTER IN OUR RAVINES AS
PART OF A PILOT PROGRAM IN ADVANCE OF THE RAVINE STRATEGY.
THIS CAME FORWARD IN OUR 2019 BUDGET PROCESS AND IT WENT
UNFUNDED. WE HAD A MOTION IN COUNT OF COUNCIL THAT SAID FUND
IT WITH A .022 INCREASE ON TAXES. 022% AND UNFORTUNATELY
THAT WOULD COST ROUGHLY SPEAKING UNDER A DOLLAR PERSON, WELL
UNDER A DOLLAR A PERSON. SO WE WILL GET A NUMBER. WE WILL HAVE
AN OPPORTUNITY TO HOLD TO ACCOUNT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS AT
CITY COUNCIL TO SAY IF YOU’RE SERIOUS ABOUT PROTECTING
BIODIVERSITY AND SAVING OUR RAVINES YOU’VE GOT TO VOTE FOR
INCREASED RESOURCES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> WELL, THAT’S A WARM UP FOR BUDGET SEASON. SORRY PERRUZZA. >> COUNCILLOR COLLE.
>> YEAH, I HAVE 3 MOTIONS I’D LIKE TO MOVE. THE FIRST ONE IS
THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE REQUEST
THAT THE GENERAL MANAGER [READING] SECOND MOTION THAT [READING] AND MY THIRD MOTION IS RECOMMEND
THAT DIRECT THE GENERAL MANAGER OF PARKS]
READING] THE ONE ABOUT THE SEWERS I JUST
THINK THAT WE TAKE FOR GRANTED THE FACT THAT OUR RAVINES WHICH
COVER 20% OF TORONTO’S LAND MASS ARE PLAYING A CRITICAL ROLE IN
ABSORBING AND MANAGING OUR WATER OUTFALLS, OUR EXTREME WEATHER
EVENTS. SO WITHOUT THE NATURAL SEWERS YOU COULD IMAGINE WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN TO OUR EXISTING SEWERS AND OUR ROADS, ET CETERA.
SO OUR RAVINES ARE TAKEN FOR GRANTED.
THAT’S WHY BY DOING THIS REPORT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET SOME
RESOURCES SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES INVESTED IN OUR RAVINES TO
ENSURE THEY CONTINUE TO PLAY THE CRITICAL ROLE IN STORM WATER
MANAGEMENT AND PERHAPS EXPAND THEIR ROLE THESE EXTREME WEATHER
EVENTS WILL CONTINUE TO COME ONE AFTER ANOTHER AS WE’VE SEEN IN
REPEAT YEARS. SECONDLY, IN TERMS OF THE PUBLIC
AWARENESS CAMPAIGN, I THINK WE’VE GOT A LOT OF VEHICLES
WITHIN CITY OF TORONTO WHEREBY WEKTD USE — WE COULD USE ALL KINDS OF
COMMUNICATIONS TO IDENTIFY THESE INVASIVE SPECIES SO THAT
TORONTONIANS WILL BECOME MORE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT THEY LOOK
LIKE AND IDENTIFY THEM AND BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND BE
ABLE TO MOVE TO EVENTUALLY REPLACING THE INVASIVE SPECIES.
AND ALSO THIS IS GOING TO COST A GREAT DEVELOP RESOURCES TO DO IT
RIGHT. AND SO I THINK IT’S VERY, VERY TRUTHFUL THAT WE’RE
TALKING ABOUT THE REALITY OF THE COST OF THESE MOTIONS AND THE
COST OF THIS BIODIVERSITY REPORT. THAT IT IS GOING TO
MEAN A COMMITMENT OF DOLLARS TO DO THIS GOING FORWARD. I DO
WANT TO SAY THAT WE’RE ASKING THE PARKS
RECREATION AND FORESTRY TO DO SO MUCH THEY’RE ALREADY DOING A
GREAT DEAL. THEY’RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO
UNDERTAKE EVERYTHING WE’RE ASKING OF THEM IN TERMS OF
DEALING WITH BIODIVERSITY. SO I THINK WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO
COMMIT TO SMALLER CAPITAL DOLLARS FOR SURE IN GOING
FORWARD IN OPERATING DOLLARS. JUST I DO WANT TO MENTION THAT I AM A JOGGER AND I GO THROUGH
MANY RAVINES AND I GO THROUGH AND SO FORTH. I HAVE NEVER SEEN
OR PARKS LOOKING SO CLEAN AND SO GREEN AS I HAVE THIS YEAR. AND I DON’T KNOW BEEN IMPROVED
MIAMI OR WHATEVER IT IS, BUT I KNOW THEY ARE GREEN, THIS COULD
BE SOME INVASIVE SPECIES IN THERE, BUT AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO
COMMEND OUR PARKS, RECREATION FORESTRY PEOPLE, I HAVE REALLY,
YOU KNOW, BEEN AMAZED BY THE ABSENCE OF PLACE STICK, THE
ABSENCE OF GARBAGE ELEMENTS THAT COME IN AND THE CONTROL OF OUR
NATURAL GRASS AREAS, OUR MOWED LAWNS SO I JUST
WANT TO COMMEND STAFF. BECAUSE I KNOW I’M — MY STAFF LIKE I’M
SURE ALL MY COUNCILLORS — >> IF YOU COULD.
>> WRAP UP. WE HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING GOOD FOR A CHANGE
SOMETIMES. >> NO, I LIKE POSITIVE STUFF,
BUT WITHIN FIVE MINUTES WE LIKE POSITIVE —
>> ANYWAYS I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD. AGAIN, I
THINK STAFF IS TO BE COMMENDED BY THE INCREDIBLE COMMITMENT
THEY’VE MADE TO KEEPING OUR PARKS CLEAN AND GREEN AND SAFE.
AND I WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD.
>> GREAT, THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR COLLE. NOW, CLARITY, COUNCILLOR
PERRUZZA, ARE YOU MOVING THIS ITEM OR ARE YOU WITHDRAWING IT? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I’VE — AS YOU
KNOW I WAS GOING MOVE A MOTION ON THIS ALL PERMITTING, RAVINES,
CAN YOU PULL OUT A TWIG WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT A PERMIT, ONE
PERSON SAYS NO, YOU CAN’T BECAUSE YOU’VE GOT BYLAW THAT IS
DON’T DO THAT, I MEAN, BYLAW THAT IS PROHIBIT YOU FROM DOING
THAT. ANOTHER PERSON SAYS WELL, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY WE CAN
ORGANIZE SCHOOL GROUPS AND GO DOWN AND REMOVE THEM PROVIDING
THEY HAVE SUPERVISION. SO I WANTED TO GET SOME CLARITY ON
ALL OF THAT BUT I HAVE BEEN SOMEWHAT MOVED BY OUR VERY
KNOWLEDGEABLE STAFF THAT IT IS A VERY COMPLEX ISSUE THAT WOULD
REQUIRE SOME BYLAW REVIEWS AND OTHER THINGS. SO I WILL TAKE
THAT OFF LINE WITH THEM AND IF AT THE END OF THE DAY I’M NOT
CONVINCED THEN I WOULD MOVE MY MOTION AT A LATER DATE. BUT
WHILE I DO HAVE THE MICROPHONE I’LL JUST TAKE ANOTHER 15
SECONDS TO SAY THAT THIS IS A VERY GOOD REPORT AND IT’S VERY
GOOD DIRECTION FOR US TO BE MOVING IN AND I’M VERY, VERY
SUPPORTIVE. . >>THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR
PERRUZZA. ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? NO. WE’RE GOOD. SO WE CAN START VOLTING
ON THESE MOTIONS. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THEM AS A PACKAGE OR —
>>PACKAGE. >> A PACKAGE. OKAY. SO WE’RE
GOING TO — SO A MOTIONS A, B AND C
FROM COUNCILLOR LAYTON, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED?
THAT IS CARRIED. AND MOTIONS A, B AND C FROM COUNCILLOR COLLE,
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED. AND THE ITEM
AS AMENDED, YOU A THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. THAT IS
CARRIED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM
9 IT’S HELD BY COUNCILLOR LAYTON. COUNCILLOR LAYTON, QUESTIONS FOR
STAFF. NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>> ANY ITEM 9, NUMBER OF
TICKETS ISSUED AND CHARGES LAID AGAINST BUILDERS FOR FAILURE TO
PROTECT CITY TREES, ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS? DEPUTY MAYOR MINNAN-WONG.
>> WHEN SOMEONE’S BUILDING AN IN FILL OUT HOUSE AND HAS A TREE
THAT’S GETTING IN THE WAY DO WE USUALLY LET THEM CHOP DOWN THE
TREE? >>YES, WE DO.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PERMIT REMAINS
FOR REMOVING A TREE THAT’S IN THE FOOTPRINT OF BYLAW ZONING
DEPENDS ON WHERE THE TREE IS LOCATED IN CONTEXT OF THE SITE
AND WHAT VARIANCES MIGHT BE REQUIRED.
>> ALL RIGHT. SO MAYBE I’LL BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPECIFIC. IF
AN INN FILL — IF THERE IS AN EXISTING TREE AND THE PLAN FOR
THE IN FILL HOUSE COMES DIRECTLY CONFLICTS LIKE IT IS EXACTLY
WHERE, FOR EXAMPLE, ON FOOTPRINT WHERE THE NEW PROPERTY IS, THE
NEW HOUSE IS DO WE ALLOW THAT TREE TO BE REMOVED?
>> YES. >> AND THAT’S ALL THE TIME,
RIGHT? >> ALL THE TIME. IT DEPENDS
UPON VARIANCES ON THE SITE, BUT —
>> NO, NO. >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> IF VARIANCE IS NOT APPROVED THAT’S CLEAR, OR IF IT’S NOT IN
THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE
COULD BE A DISCUSSION, BUT IT ACTUALLY CON DMRIKTS, THE I
CAN’T REMEMBER ADVANCES ARE APPROVED AND YOU CAN’T BUILD THE
HOUSE BECAUSE THIS IS A TREE THERE DOESN’T MATTER HOW OLD THE
TREE IS OR WHAT THE TREE IS, WE HAVE A POLICY OF LETTING THEM —
ALLOWING THE PERMIT, CORRECT. >> IT’S NOT A POLICY. IT’S
BUILT INTO THE BYLAW. >>OH IT’S BUILT INTO THE BYLAW.
>> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS]. >> OKAY. AND IF — AND USUALLY
USUALLY — I MEAN I SHOULD PROBABLY ASK YOU THIS OFF LINE
AND IF IT’S OUTSIDE THAT FOOTPRINT THEN THIS IS A LITTLE
BIT MORE DISCRETION INVOLVED, CORRECT.
>> CORRECT. >> THANKS.
>> THANK YOU DEPUTY MAYOR MINNAN-WONG. COUNCILLOR LAYTON.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND J OFT A COUPLE VERY QUICK
QUESTIONS ON THE CHART ON PAGE 3 THIS HAD TO DO WITH THE CON A
PREVENTIONSES AND THE ORDERS TO COMPLY AND THE PART 3, CAN YOU
TELL ME WHAT THE RESPONSE TIME IS FOR — THESE ARE ALL DONE
BASED ON COMPLAINT, CORRECT. >> MOST CALLS RECEIVED COME IN
THROUGH 311, THAT’S CORRECT. >> I THINK I’M A GOOD
PERCENTAGE OF THOSE CALLS FOR THESE ONES IN PARTICULAR. THE — HOW LONG IS THE PERIOD
THAT IT TAKES FOR TO YOU INSPECT?
>> THE TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE CAN FLUCTUATE
THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. [INAUDIBLE] CURRENTLY IN 2019,
WE’RE AT ABOUT FIVE DAYS AND OUR SERVICE STANDARD IS 7 DAYS.
>> SERVICE STANDARD IS 7 DAYS. YOU GET A CALL THAT A TREE IS
BEING ON A CONSTRUCTION SITE IS BEING INJURED POTENTIALLY, AND
IT TAKES 5 TO 7 DAYS TO RESPOND.>> IT’S AVERAGING RIGHT NOW 5
DAYS, HOWEVER CERTAIN CAUSE ARE PRIORITIZED ABOVE OTHERS.
>> OKAY. AND THEN ORDERS TO COMPLY ARE WHEN YOU SEE
SOMETHING THAT IS IN CONRAVENTION OF THE BYLAW.
>> WORK THAT CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED TO CORRECT
[INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS OBSERVED ON SITE.
>> SO WHEN THERE’S NOT WORK THAT CAN BE DONE FOR INSTANCE
THEY INJURE THE TREE AS A RESULT OF SOMETHING WHAT HAPPENS IN
THAT CASE? >>IN A CASE OF INJURY THIS IS
SOME WORK THAT CAN BE DONE, CORRECTED MEASURES, [INAUDIBLE] .
>> WE WOULDN’T ISSUE A FINE RIGHT OFF THE BAT.
>>A FINE, NO, THERE WOULD BE AN INSPECTION FEE ASSOCIATED BUT
NOT FINE >>EVEN IF DAMAGE WAS DONE TO
THE TREE. >> EVEN IF DAMAGE WAS DONE. SO
INSTITUTE A FINE, REQUIRES FURTHER LEGAL ACTION.
>> SO THEN YOU — THEN THE ORDERS TO COMPLY ARE WHEN YOU
ISSUE ORDERS TO DO SOME KIND OF REMEDY. NOW, THE NUMBER OF
ORDERS TO COMPLY AND THE PART 3 SUMMONS, IS RATHER DRAMATIC, THE
REDUCTION, I’M WONDERING IF CAN WE ENSURE THAT ALL OF THOSE
ISSUES, OR ORDERS TO COMPLY WERE INVESTIGATED TODAY ENSURE THAT
THEY WERE IN FACT, COMPLIED TO? >> SO WE PRIORITIZE WHICH INFRACTION SITES LEAD TO
PROSECUTION AND WE DO THAT IN CONSULTATION [INAUDIBLE] THE
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE IMPACT ON SITE. [INAUDIBLE].
>> OKAY. I MIGHT — [INAUDIBLE] .
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR LAYTON. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA.
>> I JUST, I WANT TO KNOW, WHEN DO YOU — SO THE ADDS OF RIGHT
CONSTRUCTION WHEN DO YOU ISSUE THE PERMIT TO REMOVE THE TREE?
I’LL TELL YOU WHY I ASK THIS QUESTION. YOU KNOW, REZONING
APPLICATION WAS APPLIED FOR IN MY AREA SOME YEARS AGO. WENT
THROUGH THE PROCESS ALL THE WAY TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD.
THEY GOT THIS ZONING AND PROCEEDED TO REMOVE A WHOLE
BUNCH OF TREES LIKE 250 TREES OR SOMETHING. AND THEY HAVEN’T
BUILT A SINGLE THING YET, RIGHT. THEY MAY ONE DAY BUILD BUT YOU
COULD HAVE HAD A WHOLE BUNCH OF TREES YOU KNOW CONTINUE ON UNTIL
THEY WERE ACTUALLY READY TO CONSTRUCT, RIGHT. SO — SO AT
WHAT POINT DOES SOMEONE BECAUSE OF AS OF RIGHT CONSTRUCTION
PERMITTED TO REMOVE A TREE? >>THE ALLOWANCE IS BASED UPON
BUILDING [INAUDIBLE] PERMIT CAN BE APPLIED FOR AT ANY POINT IN
TIME, BUT THE ACTUALLY PERMIT WOULD NOT BE — [INAUDIBLE] .
>> SO TECHNICALLY YOU COULD HAVE A SITUATION WHERE SOMEBODY
REMOVES TREES BECAUSE THEY’RE IN THE WAY OF CONSTRUCTION AND
NEVER ACTUALLY BUILD ANYTHING. >> IT’S TOO EXPENSIVE.
>> YEAH, THIS IS THE POTENTIAL FOR THAT SORT OF BEHAVIOR, YES. >> THANK YOU. >> YOU’RE DONE? THANK YOU,
COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, ANY
SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM. COUNCILLOR LAYTON.
>> YES, JUST VERY QUICKLY. THANK YOU TO STAFF FOR REPORTING
BACK. I JUST FIND THAT THE DISCREPANCY IN THE NUMBER OF —
FIRST, I THINK THIS PROBLEM IS SO FRUSTRATING YOU AND YOU CAN
WALK BY A SITE THESE ARE CONTRACTORS THAT WORK IN OUR
CITY THAT KNOW WHAT THE BYLAWS ARE, AND THEN THEY’RE STARTING
— THEY’RE PILING STUFF FROM A — FROM DIGGING OUT A BASEMENT
RIGHT UP NEXT TO A CITY TREE. LIKE THAT’S DESTROYING OUR
PROPERTY. THOSE TREES ARE OURS. NOT TO — NOT TO TOO MUCH
OWNERSHIP OVER NATURE, BUT THEY BELONG TO THE CITY. WE PAID FOR
THEM. WE’RE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRUNING THEM. THEY DIE WE’VE
GOT TO DEPLACE THEM AND THESE TREES CAN BE THIS FOR 20, 30,
40, 50, A HUNDRED YEARS PLUS AND YET THESE CONTRACTORS THAT WORK
IN OUR CITY ARE JUST — SOME OF THEM, NOT ALL OF THEM, SOME OF
THEM ARE JUST DISREGARDING OUR BYLAW. AND THE FACT THAT IT
TAKES SOME A, SOMEONE TO REPORT IT TO HAVE THE WITH WITH ALL TO
SAY THAT MIGHT BE HURTING THE TREE IN THE CITY OF TORONTO
BYLAW AND FOR US TO NOT ACTUALLY IMMEDIATELY SOME SIGNIFICANT
FINE OR SAY YOU KNOW WHAT NEXT TIME YOU GO FOR A BUILDING
PERMIT YOU’RE NOT GOING TO GO FAST TRACK YOU’RE GOING TO GO
SLOW TRACK, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME — LIKE THEY ARE SOMETIMES WHEN
THERE ARE HONEST MISTAKES MADE, BUT WHEN THESE ARE CONTRACTORS
THAT DO A LOT OF WORK IN OUR CITY THEY DAMN WELL KNOW BETTER
AND I’M TIRED OF MAKING THESE CALLS IN AND SEEING THESE TREES
GET DESTROYED BY —
IT’S HARD TO FIND A GOOD CONTRACTOR ACTUALLY APPLIES TO
THOSE THAT WILL PROTECT OUR TREES AS WELL. I JUST THINK WE
NEED TO FIGURE OUT A BETTER WAY OF PUSHING BACK AND GETTING COME
COMPLIANCE BECAUSE CLEARLY WITH ALMOST OVER 2,000 CONTRAVENTINS THAT WERE
INSPECTED LAST YEAR THAT’S TOO MANY. SO I THINK THERE’S
SOMETHING BETTER WE CAN DO I JUST HAVEN’T THOUGHT OF IT YET.
THANK YOU. >>THERE IS NO SLOW TRACK.
>>EXTRA SLOW TRACK. >>THANK YOU.
>> WAIT FOR TREE TO GET — TO REVIVE ITSELF OR TO REGROW.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR LAYTON. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON
THIS ITEM? >> [OFF MIC].
>> MOVING RECEIPT. OKAY RECEIPT IS BEING MOVED. ALL
THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT’S
CARRIED. >> ITEM 10 PROPOSED WASTEWATER
ENERGY TRANSFER PILOT PROJECTS. DENNIS –>> [OFF MIC] .
>>I HAVE A MOTION FROM STAFF. >>OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
WE’RE NOT ON SPEAKERS. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. YEAH,
DEPUTY MAYOR MINNAN-WONG. >> I READ THE PILOT PROJECT
GOES THROUGH THE — WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THIS VENDOR
BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOME SORT OF PROPRIETARY THING, AND I’M JUST
WONDERING LIKE [INAUDIBLE]
SHOULDN’T GO OUT FOR A PROPOSAL CALL AND.
>> IT’S NOT NECESSARILY PROPRIETARY AS OPPOSED TO THE
VENDOR APPROACHED US AND THAT HE HAD A COUPLE OF VIABLE LOCATIONS
WITH SOME INTERESTED PARTIES TO EXPLORE. SO WE DO RECOGNIZE
THAT THERE ARE OTHER COMPETITORS THAT MAY BE INTERESTED IN DOING
SOMETHING SIMILAR TODAY OR IN FUTURE. WE DO KNOW OF ANOTHER
COMPANY THAT HAS COME FORWARD FOR A DIFFERENT PART OF THE
CITY. AND SO WE WANTED TO DO THE PILOT SO WE COULD — A
FRAMEWORK DOCUMENT WHICH WILL ALLOW OTHER ENTITIES. TO DO AN
RFP WOULD BE USE IDENTIFYING THE VARIOUS LOCATIONS AND PUTTING
TOGETHER THE OTHER [INAUDIBLE] .
>> MR. CHAIR, AS I READ IN THE REPORT THE PILOT’S SUCCESSFUL
WHEN YOU ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME, IS
THAT CORRECT? >>ON THESE 2 SPECIFIC
LOCATIONS, YES. >> WE’RE SOURCING ON THESE 2
SPECIFIC LOCATIONS. >>AGAIN, THROUGH YOU, MR.
CHAIR, WE DID NOT PUT OUT A CALL. TORONTO — DID NOT HAVE
AN RFP OUT, SO WE’RE NOT FOLLOWING A PROCUREMENT TYPE
PROCESS. WE ARE FOLLOWING THE COUNCIL APPROVED PLAN TO LOOK AT
DIFFERENT WAYS TO USE ENERGY AND TAKING WASTE HEAT FROM SEWAGE
WAS IDENTIFIED IN ONE OF OUR TRANSFORM TO’S POLICY
STRATEGIES. THAT WAS OPEN-ENDED TO ALLOW ENTITIES TO APPROACH US
THE PROPOSALS AS OPPOSED TO US MAKING THE RESPECTIVE CALLS.
AND SO WE’RE RESPONDING TO THE COMPANY COMING FORWARD AND
SAYING WE HAVE INTERESTED PARTIES THAT WANT TO EXPLORE.
>> YOU USE THE TERM SOUL SOURCE, YES.
>> YOU USED THAT I’M SAYING WE DID NOT HAVE A TENDER CALL. SO
WE ARE NOT — >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> WHAT DO YOU CALL IT WHEN YOU DON’T HAVE A TENDER CALL AND
GIVE A CONTRACT OUT. >> AN UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL.
>> OH. >> SO ESSENTIALLY IT’S AN
UNSOLICITED PROPOSAL, HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE A FRAMEWORK TO
CONSIDER IT THAT COUNCIL ASKED US TO LOOK AT IN GENERAL, TO
LOOK AT HEAT RECOVERY AND OTHER ENERGY MEASURES.
>> ARE THERE ANY — SO 2 SITES, WHAT ARE THE 2 SITES.
>> THE 2 SITES THAT WERE SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED IN THE
RECOMMENDATIONS ONE IS SUNNY BROOK HOSPITAL SIDE, SECOND ONE
IS. >> [OFF MIC].
>> COLLEGE AND ASSOCIATED NEARBY IS THE GENERAL HOSPITAL
SITE. >>SO THOSE 2 ARE REALLY CLOSE
TO ONE ANOTHER. >> YOU’RE COMFORTABLE WITH
DOING THE SOUL SOURCE. >>AGAIN, THIS UNSOLICITED
PROPOSAL, I HAVE NO PROPOSAL CALL OUT THIS.
>> THERE’S ANOTHER ARRANGEMENT WHEN SOMEONE CALLS WITH AN IDEA
— [INAUDIBLE] POLICY FRAMEWORK, THE CITY OF
VANCOUVER DID DEVELOP ONE AND WE’VE LOOKED AT THAT. HOWEVER,
WE DO NEED TO LOOK AT HOW WE WOULD DO IT IN TORONTO.
>> SO YOU AND THE PROCUREMENT OFFICER SATISFIED WITH THIS
ARRANGEMENT? >>THROUGH YOU, WE’RE WORKING
WITH THE ENERGY OFFICE AND LEGAL, NOT PROCUREMENT, BECAUSE
AGAIN, WET NOT HAVE A TENDER CALL OUT THIS. WE WOULD MAKE
MONEY ON THIS IN FACT. SO THERE’S THE POTENTIAL FOR
TORONTO WATER TO EARN REVENUE OFF OF — OFF OF THIS PROPOSAL.
>> I’M JUST — SO THIS HASN’T BEEN REVIEWED BY [INDISCERNIBLE]
OFFICE. >>NO, AGAIN BECAUSE WE’RE NOT
PROCURING ANYTHING. IT’S NOT LIKE TORONTO WATER PUT OUT A
VENDOR CALL. WE’RE NOT BUYING THE EQUIPMENT, WE’RE NOT
PURCHASING ANYTHING, THERE IS NO INVESTMENT ON OUR PART. ALL OF
THE INVESTMENT WILL BE HANDLED BY THE THIRD PARTIES.
>>THEY’RE GIVING ACCESS TO CITY SITE, YES?
>>THROUGH YOU, YES, THEY WOULD GET ACCESS IN RETURN THERE WOULD
BE SOME REVENUE THAT WE WOULD EXPECT FOR USING THE WASTE HEAT
AND THE LEASE AGREEMENT. SO THAT IS THE BASIS OF THE
AGREEMENT THAT WE’RE GOING TO LOOK AT PUTTING IN PLACE WITH
THE PILOT. FIRST WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IMPLEMENTING
SOMETHING LIKE THIS DOES NOT CAUSE US OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS
WITH OUR SEWERS. SO THAT IS REALLY THE KEY OPERATIONAL
CONCERN THAT TORONTO WATER HAS. AND WE NEED TO GO A BIT FURTHER
TO EXPLORE THOSE ISSUES. >> WOULD YOU SEND THIS TO THE
PROCUREMENT OFFICE TO HAVE THEM HAVE A LOOK AT IT.
>> COULD WE? >>YEAH.
>> WE COULD SEND IT TO THEM BUT AGAIN WE’RE NOT PROCURING ANY.
>> YOU’RE GIVING THEM ACCESS TO A SITE THAT OTHERS DON’T HAVE
ACCESS TO. >> AGAIN, WE DID SO UNDER CITY
COUNCIL POLICY. >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> SORRY, THROUGH YOU, MR. CHAIR, AGAIN, THE COUNCIL’S
ALREADY ESTABLISHED AND APPROVE THE POLICY OF THE GREEN MARKET
ACCELERATION PROGRAM WHEREBY THESE TYPES OF PROJECTS CAN BE
UNDERTAKEN IF THIS IS NO COST TO THE CITY. SO AND IT’S EXACTLY
THAT WHERE YOU ARE GIVING ACCESS TO CITY RESOURCES SO THAT THE
CITY CAN TRY OUT NEW TECHNOLOGIES AS WELL AS HAVING A
LOOK AT NEW AND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES —
>> YOU SAID THE CITY NOT MAKING — YOU SAID THE CITY’S
NOT WHAT? WHEN I — SO THEY ARE A LOT OF
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE WE’RE NOT PAYING FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE
FOR EXAMPLE, I DON’T KNOW I LET A FOOD TRUCK GO ON SQUARE I’M
NOT MAKING ANY MONEY, BUT THIS IS A PROCESS FOR THAT.
>> YES, THAT’S WHAT WE’RE SAYING. THIS IS A PROCESS FOR
THIS AS WELL THAT COUNCIL’S APPROVED AND WE’RE FOLLOWING
THAT — >> ALL RIGHT.
>> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS]. >> I’LL TAKE IT UP WITH —
>> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS] .
>> DO YOU HAVE TO. >> YEAH.
>>OKAY. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. .>>I GUESS, I GUESS I’LL ASK THE
QUESTION FOR COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG. AND HOW DO WE
FIGURE OUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WHETHER WE’RE GETTING BEST
VALUE? SO WE’RE GOING MAKE SOME MONEY. HOW DO WE — HOW ARE WE
ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THIS PARTICULAR OUTFIT IS GIVING US
THE BEST VALUE OR THE ACCESS WE ARE GIVING THEM.
>> THROUGH YOU, MR. CHAIR, THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE’RE ASKING
TO DO THE PILOT. WE’RE GOING TO DEVELOP SOME OF THE CRITERIA
THAT WOULD INFORM A BROADER POLICY, BUT WE HAVE TO START
SOMEWHERE AND WE’VE BEEN APPROACHED BY THIS PARTICULAR
COMPANY TO LOOK AT DOING RECOVERY WORK. WE DO KNOW THAT
YOU NEED EXTERNAL PARTY ARRANGEMENTS WITH PEOPLE THAT
WILL BUY THAT WASTE HEAT. AND THEY’VE GOT LETTERS FROM SUNNY
BROOK INITIALLY. SO THAT IS PART OF THE WORK THAT WE WOULD
DO IS FIGURING OUT WHAT IS THE VALUE OF THE WASTE HEAT, TRY TO
DEVELOP ON MARKET VALUATION NUMBER FOR THAT. COMPARE IT TO
OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS AS WELL
AS WHAT WE’VE DONE ON OPPOSITE SIDE, DEEP LAKE WATER COOLING IS
FORM OF ENERGY TRANSFER. SO WE WOULD LOOK AT THAT AGREEMENT
THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE. >>SO THESE 2 PARTICULAR SITES
AT THE END OF THE DAY MAY NOT GIVE US BEST VALUE BUT BENCH
MARKS BY WHICH TO ACHIEVE BEST VALUE GOING FORWARD.
>> THAT’S CORRECT. YOU HAVE TO START NEW PROGRAMS AND THE COUNCIL POLICY WAS TRYING TO
GIVE US THE ABILITY TO DO SOME INNOVATIVE WORK. THAT’S THE
FIRST TIME WE’RE TRYING IT IN THE CITY. SO WE NEED TO TAKE IT
A BIT FURTHER AND NEED COUNCIL’S AUTHORITY TO DO THAT WORK TO TRY
TO FIGURE OUT SOME OF THESE DETAILS.
>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR
PERRUZZA. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ITEM? >> JUST IN TERMS OF I THINK
THERE WAS NEED TO INCLUDE THE REFERENCE TO THE HOSPITAL NEXT
DOOR THROUGH THE COLLEGE, THAT IS THE HOSPITAL SITE.
>> THAT’S CORRECT. I BELIEVE COUNCILLOR LAYTON HAS A MOTION.
>>OH, OKAY, OKAY. >> TO MAKE THAT SPECIFIC
AMENDMENT. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU,
COUNCILLOR COLLE. DEPUTATIONS ARE OVER. SPEAKERS COUNCILLOR LAYTON.
>> I HAVE MOTION THAT HAVE GIVEN TO ME BY STAFF THAT WE ADD
TO RECOMMENDATION 1 AND/OR WILLIAM — GENERAL HOSPITAL. TO
THE LIST OF PROPOSED PILOT SITES. >> SO WE’VE GOT A PROGRAM AT
THE CITY CALLED GREEN MARKET ACCELERATOR PROGRAM. SOMEONE
CAME TO US AND SAID WE KNOW YOU’RE NOT LOOKING, SURE.
THAT’S NO PROBLEM. YOU COULD ASK
QUESTIONS OF THE MOVER. >> I’M NOT GOING TO KNOW THE
ANSWER BUT I’LL TRY. >> I DON’T KNOW WHY THESE ARE
ON THE LIST AND NOT OTHERS BUT THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION.
>> THE OTHER QUESTION IS: I JUST WANT TO BETTER UNDERSTAND
OUR SEWER SYSTEM BECAUSE WHAT THIS SUGGESTS — AND I DON’T
KNOW WHAT THE SEWER NETWORK IS AT THE COLLEGE FOR EXAMPLE, OR
WHERE IT COMES OUT ONTO THE CITY AND HOW BIG THAT SEWER IS AND
HOW MUCH HEAT THAT WOULD GENERATE BUT I’M NOW ADDING THIS
OTHER PLACE THAT MIGHT BE GOING INTO THE SAME SEWER BUT NOT
YOU’RE SORT OF, YOU KNOW, SAYING WHAT COUNCILOR MINNAN-WONG WAS
ALLUDING TO IS MAYBE WE SHOULD ALLOW THE PILOT TO GO FORWARD ON
THE 2 SITES, SEE WHAT THE VALUES ARE, ESTABLISH THOSE AND WE
MIGHT BE IN A BOTCHED NEGOTIATE NEGOTIATING POSITION ON THE
THIRD SITE. SO INSTEAD OF SLIPPING IT IN THERE.
>>JUST SO WE HAVE CLARITY THAT WAS AN ERROR ON STAFF’S PART IN
THAT WE DID NOT INCLUDE THAT NAME IN THE RECOMMENDATION.
WHEN THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE’VE BEEN HAVING WITH THE PROPONENT
BECAUSE IT IS IN THE SAME SEWER, AND IT WAS ALWAYS INTENDED TO BE
THERE, THIS IS TO CLARIFY THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE’VE HAD WITH
THE COMPANY. SO IT WAS OUR ERROR NOT INCLUDING IT IN THE
ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE HAD IT
IN THE STAFF — >> SO THE SITE THAT YOU’RE
TALKING ABOUT THAT YOU’RE PICKING BOTH SEWERS, BOTH THE
SEWER — MAIN SEWER I’M ASSUMING AND THE SEWER FROM THE HOSPITAL,
THEY’RE BOTH GOING INTO THE SAME PIPE —
>> IT WOULD BE COMING OFF THE SAME SEWER SEGMENT.
>> YOU WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO — YOU WOULDN’T BE ABLE TO SEPARATE
IT ANY WAY THEY WOULD NEED AN AGREEMENT IN ANY CASE.
>>THROUGH YOU, MR. CHAIR, YES, THIS ONLY WORKS IF YOU HAVE
SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO BUY THE WASTE HEAT OFF OF THE COMPANY
THAT’S GOING TO MAKE THE INVESTMENT. SO YOU NEED AN
INTERESTED THIRD PARTY. IF THAT DEAL FALLS THROUGH THERE WILL BE
NO HEAT RECOVERY PROJECT BECAUSE THIS IS — THIS IS NO THIRD
PARTY TRANSACTION THAT WILL OCCUR.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. JUST SOME CLERICAL
ITEM LUNCH IS IN 9 MINUTES. DO YOU WANT TO MOVE —
>> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS]. >> OR CONTINUE TO FINISH
>>I’LL MOVE TO COMPLETE THE AGENDA.
>> MOVE TO COMPLETE THE AGENDA IS ON THE TABLE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED?
THAT IS CARRIED. >> SOMEONE CAME TO US AND SAID
YOU’RE LOSE AGO BUNCH OF HEAT ON YOUR SEWAGE LINE AS YOU TAKE IT
BACK TO GET TREATED. I’D LIKE TO PAY TO INSTALL SOMETHING THAT
WILL TAKE SOME THAT HAVE HEAT OFF. AND HEAT A LOCAL — A
BUILDING WITH IT. THEREBY REDUCING THE — THE IN ALL
LIKELIHOOD REQUIREMENT FOR NATURAL GAS HEATING. IT’S A
TECHNOLOGY USED ELSEWHERE BUT NOT IN TORONTO. SO WE NEED TO
DEVELOP A FRAMEWORK — SOMEONE CAME TO YOU AND SAID I WANT TO
BUY A LITTLE HEAT FROM YOUR SEWAGE PIPE THAT YOU’RE NOT
USING I’M GOING TO PAY YOU FOR IT. I’M GOING TO PAY YOU FOR
EVERYTHING THAT GOES INTO IT AND PAY YOU FOR IT. THERE MIGHT BE
A LOT OF COMPLICATED THINGS THAT WE’RE NOT FACTORING IN.
SHOULDN’T OPEN TO EVERYONE, THINGS LIKE AGREEMENTS AROUND
THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE IMPACT THAT HOW MUCH HEAT IS BEING
TAKEN OFF THIS SYSTEM OR UNANTICIPATED THINGS THAT HAPPEN
IN TORONTO SEWER SYSTEM THAT THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE EXPERIENCED
ELSEWHERE. SO WE WANT SOME TIME TO BETA TEST THIS. IT JUST SO
HAPPENS THAT SOMEONE CAME TO US SAYING WE HAVE THESE AGREEMENTS
WITH THESE OTHER INSTITUTIONS, WE HAD LIKE TO SET SETUP A PILOT
IN THIS WAY. IF WE WANT TO SEE MOVEMENT AND INNOVATION COME OUT
OF THE CITY THIS IS THE KIND THING WE SHOULD LOOK AT. IT
PASSES THE SMELL TEST. BECAUSE IF IT’S DEMONSTRATED IT’S BEING
USED ON SEWERS ELSEWHERE, THERE IS MONEY CHANGING HANDS AND IT
BRINGS IN REVENUE TO THE CITY AND IT’S AN ESTABLISHED POLICY
GOAL THAT WE HAVE FROM OUR TRANSFORM TO. SO I THINK THAT
THIS IS A GOOD STEP FORWARD. I’M — THIS WAS ONE OTHER SITE
THAT I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO SEE ON THAT LIST THAT’S ACTUALLY IN
MY WARD UNFORTUNATELY IT’S NOT, IT’S OKAY, BUT WE’LL — I’M GLAD
TO SEE THAT THIS IS TAKING THE NEXT STEP FORWARD AND I HOPE
THAT IT WORKS OUT AND IF IT DOESN’T, WELL, WE TRIED. >>WE HAVE THE MOTION. THE ITEM
AS AMENDED ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. THAT IS CARRIED. ITEM
NUMBER 11 HELD BY COUNCILLOR LAYTON, 2020 CANADA-ONTARIO AGREEMENT
RESPECTING GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AND ECOSYSTEM HEALTH.
>>MR. CHAIR, IN THE INTEREST OF TIME UNLESS THERE’S QUESTIONS OF
STAFF I’M HAPPY TO MOVE RECEIPT OF THE PROGRAM THANK STAFF AND
APOLOGIZE IF THEY STAYED LONGER THAN THEY HAD TO JUST IN
INTEREST OF FINISHING THE THE AGENDA AND THE ROUGH TIME FRAME
THAT WE HAD EXPECTED. >> OKAY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
MOTION TO ADOPT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED THAT IS CARRIED.
ITEM NUMBER 12 CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN STATUS REPORT.
IT WAS A WALK ON ITEM FROM COUNCILLOR MINNAN-WONG, ALL
THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED. THAT IS CARRIED. FINAL ITEM ALSO A
WALK ON ITEM E-SCOOTER OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT. E-SCOOTERS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
>>. >> JUST VERY QUICKLY.
>> COUNCILLOR LAYTON. >> STAFF ARE WORKING ON A
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR THE CITY OF TORONTO THAT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVINCIAL — THE PROVINCIAL FRAMEWORK BUT
IT’S JUST THEY HASN’T DEVELOPED IT YET, CORRECT?
>>THAT’S CORRECT. THIS WAS A PREVIOUS MOTION THAT CAME
THROUGH THIS COMMITTEE THAT STAFF SHOULD WORK ON A
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR E-SCOOTER AS WELL AS SIMILAR
TYPES OF MOBILITY SO WE’VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT. THE PROVINCE
HAS NOW ANNOUNCED THAT THEY’LL BE DOING A PILOT PROJECT SO
WE’LL BE FEEDING INTO THAT PILOT PROJECT AND NEED SOME
REGULATIONS IN THE MEANTIME. >> SO CURRENTLY IS IT LEGAL TO
RIDE AN E-SCOOTER ON THE ROAD? >>NO, IT IS NOT.
>> IT IS NOT. AND THEREFORE, IT WOULDN’T BE LEGAL TO RIDE AN
E-SCOOTER ON THE SIDEWALK WOULD IT?
>>THE SIDEWALK DEFINITION IS A LITTLE BIT MORE — MORE VAGUE SO
THAT’S WHY THIS IS A MOTION WITHIN YOUR PACKAGE TODAY THAT EXPLICITLY MAKES IT ILLEGAL TO
RIDE AN E-SCOOTER ON THE SIDEWALK.
>> AND FOR PARKING THE VEHICLES ON THE SIDEWALK, WHAT WOULD OUR
CURRENT — WHAT WOULD OUR CURRENT REGULATIONS SAY ABOUT LOCKING IT UP OR JUST LEAVING IT
ON THE SIDEWALK? >>THERE ARE CURRENTLY
STIPULATIONS IN OUR BYLAWS THAT IF THEY — E-SCOOTER — OR
DEVICES OR ITEMS ARE LEFT IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT OBSTRUCT
SIDEWALK TRAVEL THEN THEY COULD BE CONFISCATED AND REMOVED.
LANGUAGE IN THE MOTIONS THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU MAKES THAT
EXPLICITLY CLEAR FOR E-SCOOTERS THAT THEY CAN’T BE LEFT ON THE
SIDEWALK AS AN OBSTRUCTION. >> AND HOW LONG DO WE THINK IT
WILL TAKE FOR STAFF TO COME — FOR THE PROVINCE TO DETERMINE
THE REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND FOR STAFF TO COME BACK WITH
SOMETHING. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE
PROVINCE SEEMS TO BE MOVING QUITE QUICKLY ON THIS AS THEY
ONLY A COUPLE WEEKS AGO ANNOUNCED A PILOT THAT WILL BE
— FOR FIVE YEARS AND HAD A 2-DAY COMMENT PERIOD. THEY’VE
SINCE REVISED THAT TO A COMMENT PERIOD UNTIL LATER THIS WEEK.
SO WE WILL BE COMMENTING. THEY MAY MOVE VERY QUICKLY ON THAT.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR BYLAWS ALLOW US SOME — A BIT OF
A REPRIEVE UNTIL WE HAVE A FRAMEWORK IN PLACE THAT HAS
PERMITTING SYSTEMS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. .
>>DEPUTY MAYOR MINNAN-WONG. >> THANKS. RECOMMENDATION
NUMBER 2 SAYS YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO PUT — YOU’RE NOT ALLOWED TO
PARK E-SCOOTERS ON A STREET, SIDEWALK OR PEDESTRIAN WAY,
WHERE EXACTLY ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO PARK THEM?
>>THE LANGUAGE IN THIS RECOMMENDATION WOULD ALLOW AN
INDIVIDUAL WHO WANTS TO USE AN E-SCOOTER TO USE IT ON THE ROAD
ONCE THE PROVE VICTIMS MAKES THE CHANGES TO THE HIGHWAY TRAFFIC
ACT, BUT WHEN YOU WOULD TAKE IT WITH YOU INTO YOUR DESTINATION
YOUR HOME, WORKPLACE, THAT KIND OF THING AN E-SCOOTER IS QUITE A
SMALL DEVICE IT WOULD NOT ALLOW COMMERCIAL PROLIFERATION OF
E-SCOOTERS ON OUR SIDEWALKS UNTIL WE HAVE A PERMIT SYSTEM IN
POLICE. >> SO I MEAN I’M NOT — I MA
NOT BE OPPOSED TO RECOMMENDATION NUMBER 1 AND NUMBER 3. MY OTHER
CONCERN IS IS THIS — WHEN WE TALK ABOUT E-SCOOTERS AND THIS
TYPE OF SORT OF VEHICLES, IT’S NOT WHAT CERTAINLY LEVEL OF
CONTROVERSY AND A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WISH TO COME HERE
AND MAKE THIS VIEWS KNOWN AND THIS WAS JUST DROPPED ON US. I
JUST DON’T WANT TO RUN AFOUL OF PEOPLE SAYING, YOU KNOW, WE
DIDN’T HAVE ANY NOTICE OF ARRANGEMENT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE
USUALLY THE CYCLISTS OR SCOOTER COMMUNITY USUALLY LIKES TO KNOW
ABOUT THESE THINGS AN HERE WE JUST DROPPED IT, NO ONE REALLY
KNOWS. AND I’M JUST WONDERING WHETHER YOU KNOW, WILL BE [INAUDIBLE]
RECOMMENDATION NUMBER 2. IF THAT’S THE CASE THEY SHOULD BE
ABLE TO — >> VOICE THIS CONCERNS.
>> VOICE THEIR CONCERNS THAT’S MY POINT.
>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, WE ARE WORKING THROUGH THE TIME LINES
THAT THE PROVINCE ANNOUNCED THIS PILOT AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
OUR BYLAWS ARE CLEAR. SO WHAT WE’RE PROPOSING HERE
WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE TO USE E-SCOOTERS BUT PROTECT US FROM
HAVING THEM BEING STREWN ABOUT THE SIDEWALKS AND CREATING
ACCESSIBILITY AND PEDESTRIAN HAZARDS.
>> SOME FOLKS WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT RIGHT, THIS
RECOMMENDATION. >> WE WOULD SEE SOME PEOPLE MAY
HAVE SOME CONCERNS AND THIS RECOMMENDATION ALLOWS US — IT
SAYS THAT WE’RE COMING BACK BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR WITH
THE FRAMEWORK FOR THE PERMITTING SYSTEM THAT WOULD ALLOW LARGER
USE OF E-SCOOTERS AND WHERE THEY WOULD PARK. >> OKAY. I’M FINISHED.
>> THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
I HAVE A COUPLE BUT — SO WHEN IT COMES TO E-SCOOTERS PARKING
ILLEGALLY ON THE PLACES WE’VE MENTIONED, E-SCOOTERS ARE USED
BY INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS IN A PRIVATE CONTRACT
WITH AN E-SCOOTER COMPANY. HOW WOULD WE EVER BE ABLE TO ENFORCE
ANY KIND OF VIOLATION OF LEAVING E-SCOOTERS IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY? >> WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE
BYLAW AS WRITTEN HERE WE WOULD BE ABLE TO CONFISCATE E-SCOOTERS
THAT ARE IMPROPERLY LEFT ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. AN INDIVIDUAL
THAT WANTS TO USE A SCOOTER ON THEIR OWN COULD BRING THAT INTO
THEIR PROPERTY OR WHERE THEY’RE GOING BECAUSE THEY ARE QUITE
SMALL WHEN THEY FOLD UP. THIS ALLOWS US TO PROTECT THE CITY
AGAINST HAVING MASS COMMERCIAL USE OF E SCOOT-ERS ON OUR
SIDEWALKS UNTIL WE HAVE A PERMITTING SYSTEM THAT WOULD
ALLOW THEM TO PARK IN PARTICULAR PLACES.
>> SO THE PENALTY IS CONFISCATION, THIS IS NO
WARNING, THERE’S NO FINES, IT’S CONFISCATION WE TAKE THE PRODUCT
AND IMPOUND IT. >> IN THE MANNER THAT WE’RE
TRYING TO ENACT SOMETHING QUICKLY TO PROTECT OURSELVES
FROM THIS CHANGE WE ANTICIPATE TO HAPPEN FROM THE PROVINCE, IN
PRACTICE WHAT WE HAVE FOR BICYCLES THAT ARE LEFT IN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY, IF THERE’S — AS LONG AS THEY’RE PARKED BUT NOT
RIDABLE WE DO PUT WARNINGS BUT I EXPECT WE’LL WORK WITH STAFF TO
CREATE SOMETHING SIMILAR. IF IT’S NOT OBSTRUCTING TRAVEL. IF
IT’S OBSTRUCTING TRAVEL CONFISCATION NEEDS TO HAPPEN SO
THAT THAT CAN BE OUT OF THE WAY.>> WHAT ABOUT PRIVATE PROPERTY?
I UNDERSTAND THE DISTILLERY DISTRICT HAS PROVIDED WITH A
PILOT. DO WE HAVE ANY AUTHORITY OR ENFORCEMENT ABILITY ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY. >> NO.
>> WE DO NOT. >> WHAT ABOUT FEDERAL LANDS?
I’M THINKING UNDER THE SECONDARY PLAN OR DOWNNSVIEW PARK WOULD
THEY GOVERN IT THEMSELVES. >> IF THEY ARE ROADS THAT ARE
CITY-OPERATED THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE CITY’S AUTHORITY. >> OKAY. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA. >> AND YES, I CONSIDER MY
QUESTIONS IMPORTANT TOO. BEFORE YOU ASK THE QUESTION. OKAY. AS I THINK ABOUT THIS SO WE NOW
ALLOW PEOPLE TO WILLY-NILLY PARK THEIR
PEDAL BICYCLES ALL OVER THE SIDEWALK EVERYWHERE. I MEAN,
YOU KNOW, BOTH WHERE YOU HAVE DESIGNATED BIKE, WHATEVER CALL
THEM THE RINGS OR THERE’S LIKE A LITTLE TREE THEY LOCK IT AGAINST
TREE OR THE CORNER POST. AND NOBODY LIKE [INAUDIBLE]
OBSTRUCTING PEDESTRIANS, CORRECT, MORE OR LESS?
>>AS LONG AS AT BIKE IS NOT OBSTRUCTING PEDESTRIANS THAN IT
IS LEGALLY PARKED. THEY ARE SOME STIPULATIONS AROUND NOT
PARKING ON TREES BECAUSE OF DAMAGE TO TREES.
>> OKAY, BUT IN MOST CASES YOU ALLOW PEOPLE PROVIDING THEY
HAVEN’T PARKED THIS BIKE ACROSS THE SIDEWALK, TO BASICALLY LEAD
LEAVE THEIR BICYCLES IN PLACES WHERE THEY’RE NOT BUGGING
ANYBODY ALONG THE — ALONG SIDEWALKS AND BOULEVARDS AND
THINGS HIKE THAT, CORRECT. >> CORRECT.
>> OKAY. SO WHY ARE YOU — AND — [AUDIO DIFFICULTY] UNLESS THEY’VE BEEN LEFT OVER
OVER THE WINTER OR SOMETHING AND THEN YOU CLEAN THEM UP AS PART
OF A CLEANING PROGRAM BUT NOT BECAUSE YOU’RE COLLECTING THE
BIKES, RIGHT? >>CORRECT.
>> OKAY. SO WHY WOULDN’T YOU AS PART OF A PILOT ALLOW —
ALLOW E-SCOOTERS THAT LOOK — A LOT OF THEM LOOK LIKE BICYCLES
TO BE ABLE TO DO THE SAME THING AS A BICYCLE? LIKE ON THE —
LIKE WHY DO WE NEED TO KIND OF LIKE REGULATE THE HELL OUT OF
THOSE? >> THE REGULATION PIECE IS
AROUND MASS COMMERCIAL SUPPLY OF THESE FOR E-SCOOTER SHARING IS
WHAT WE’VE SEEN IN OTHER CITIES SO THE CITY WOULD BE REPORTING
ON A PERMITTING PROGRAM FOR THOSE KIND OF E-SCOOTER USES AND
THAT’S — >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> LET ME ASK THE QUESTION ANOTHER WAY. LET’S SAY WE
APPROVE YOUR RECOMMENDATION TODAY AND THAT GOES TO THE
PROVINCE AND THE PROVINCE ADOPTS OUR RECOMMENDATION. AND
BASICALLY MAKES IT ILLEGAL FOR ANYBODY TO LEAVE THEIR E–BIKES
ALONG SIDEWALKS PARK THEM LIKE BICYCLES, RIGHT.
>> THE PROVINCE WOULDN’T IDENTIFY WHERE E-SCOOTERS CAN
PARK. THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE CITY. THE PROVINCE IS ALLOWING
THESE TO BE LEGAL FOR USE ON ROADS AND SOME STIPULATIONS
AROUND YOU HAVE TO BE 16. >> RIGHT.
>>YOU HAVE TO USE A HELMET IF YOU’RE UNDER 18, THAT’S WHAT THE
PROVINCE IS PROPOSING RIGHT NOW.>> RIGHT.
>>THEY’RE ASKING FOR FEEDBACK ON THAT.
>> RIGHT. AND WE’RE SAYING NO ON BOULEVARDS OR ALONG SIDEWALKS
AND PLACES WHERE THERE MIGHT BE SPACE FOR TO YOU PARK YOUR
E-BIKE BUT WE’RE GOING TO SAY NO BECAUSE YOU WOULD ALLOW A PEDAL
BICYCLE TO PARK THIS BUT WON’T ALLOW YOUR E-BIKE THAT IT’S THE
SAME SIZE AS THE BIKE BUT YOU CAN’T PARK THIS.
>> THIS ISSUE CAME UP THAT IT WOULD BE LEGALIZED LAST WEEK OR
THE WEEK PRIOR. AND SO AS SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL IS
DECIDE NOW TO ENSURE WE DON’T HAVE HUNDREDS, THOUSANDS
PROLIFERATE THE SIDEWALKS BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THE
YEAR IT ALLOWS SOME CLARITY THAT THEY CANNOT BE PARKED ON THE
SIDEWALK OBSTRUCTING. >>[MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>> ALSO BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR WITH A PERMIT PROGRAM.
>> IN RELATION TO — IN RELATION TO BICYCLES AND BICYCLE
USE, HOW MANY PEOPLE OUT THERE IN PERCENTAGE TERMS ARE USING
E-BIKES? IS IT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS?
>>ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT E-SCOOTERS.
>> YEAH, E-SCOOTERS, YEAH. >> I’VE SEEN HANDFULS PEOPLE.
WHAT HAPPENS IS A COMPANY COPS IN AND LEAVES THESE ON THE
SIDEWALK IN THE CITIES AND THOUSANDS IN BULK. AND THEY
BECOME A PROBLEM. SO UNTIL END OF THE YEAR REALLY LITERALLY
LIKE 2 MONTHS, 3 MONTHS FROM NOW AT THE MOST WE WOULD COME BACK
WITH A REPORT STIPULATING WHAT A PERMIT SYSTEM FOR THESE PROGRAMS
WOULD LOOK LIKE, STAFF ARE ALREADY WORK ON THAT.
>>SO WHY WOULDN’T WE TAKE THAT APPROACH. IF IT BECOMES A
PROBLEM AND AND THEN COMPANIES ARE JUST DROPPING HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF E-BIKES ALL OVER OUR SIDEWALKS THAT WE WOULD
REGULATE THEM THEN? >> WE’RE TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE
BECAUSE THE PROVINCE IS CHANGING THE RULES NOW. SO WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITY CAN BE SOMEWHAT PREPARED WHILE WE GET
THE PERMIT SYSTEM IN PLACE. >>SO WE’RE BASICALLY MOVING TO
DEAL WITH A PROBLEM THAT HASN’T OCCURRED BUT WE ARE ANTICIPATING
THAT THAT PROBLEM FOR SURE WILL HAPPEN?
>> WE KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN A PROBLEM IN MANY OTHER CITIES AND
WE ARE LOOKING TO SUPPORT THE PROVE ASPIRIN’S RECOMMENDATION
IN MAKING THESE E-SCOOTERS LEGAL BUT THE ISSUE OF PARKING THEM
HAS BEEN A PROBLEM LEAVING THEM ON SIDEWALK. THIS PROTECTS US
FROM PROBLEMS UNTIL WE HAVE A PERMIT SYSTEM.
>> SO — >> ALL RIGHT.
>> YEAH. >> COUNCILLOR, PERRUZZA YOU’RE
WELL OVER 5 MINUTES BUT THOSE WERE GOOD QUESTIONS.
>> I WANT TO — PLEASE SEPARATE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS I WANT TO
VOTE AGAINST. >> YEAH, [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS] WE
CAN ARRANGE THAT. >> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS].
>>>> THERE’S THE ONE ISSUE OF PERSONAL USE BUT THE ONE THAT’S
ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT MORE OF CERTAIN IS WHEN IT’S LIKE A
COMPANY THAT’S REPRESENTING THEM OUT AND YOU HAVE LIKE A.
>> YES, THAT’S THE PROBLEM THAT WE’RE TRYING TO ADDRESS UNTIL WE
HAVE A PERMIT SYSTEM TO REGULATE THOSE COMPANIES
>>AND YOU’VE MENTIONED THAT OTHER PLACES HAVE HAD THIS
PROBLEM SO SOMEBODY HAD WRITTEN TO ME A FORMER COLLEAGUE AT
WESTERN UNIVERSITY SAYING THAT THEY’RE FINDING THEM ALL OTHER
CAMPUS, IS THAT THE SORT OF PROBLEM THAT YOU’RE TRYING TO
AVOID HERE. >> THAT’S CORRECT.
>> THANK YOU. . >> [OFF MIC] .
>> SPEAKERS. COUNCILLOR LAYTON.
>> YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HAVE A MOTION.
>> YES, YOU DO. >> AND THIS IS TO AMEND THE —
IT LOOKS A LOT LONGER THAN — AND IT IS, BUT IT DOES 2 THINGS
IN RECOMMENDATION 11 ADDS THE TORONTO PARKING AUTHORITY TO BE
CONSULTED AND THEN IT INCLUDES THE LANGUAGE CLOTH POSSIBILITY
OF ADDING ELECTRONIC SCOOTERS TO THE BIKE SHARE FLEET AS A WAY OF
MANAGING E-SCOOTERS IN THE RIGHT WAY. AND SECOND AMENDMENT IS TO
RECOMMENDATION 2 TO DELETE THE WORD STANDING FROM THE LIST SO
THAT IT LURKS PARKING STORING. THAT WAS JUST WHAT I CAME UP
WITH QUICKLY. >> WEST OPPORTUNITY OF CAREFUL
THOUGHT HERE IN TORONTO. IT’S UNFORTUNATE THE PROVINCE IS
GIVING US 28 HOURS TO REVIEW A SET OF REGULATIONS ON THIS. BUT
THIS DOESN’T MEAN THAT IT ENDS THERE. BECAUSE THIS IS 2
DISTINCT THINGS THE PROVE VICTIMS WHO ARE TALKING ABOUT
THE PERSONAL USE ON THE ROADS AND THEN THIS IS THE SHARE THAT
IS REALLY WHERE THE CITY WILL HAVE MOST OF ITS DOMAIN AND
WHERE IT SHOULD BECAUSE WE’RE REGULATING WHAT HAPPENS IN THE
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. BECAUSE THESE VEHICLES THEY’RE NOT — THEY’RE NOT — AND THEN IT’S THE
CITY’S PROBLEM AND IT’S GOING TO — THE ENFORCEMENT AROUND THAT
IS GOING TO BE ENORMOUSLY EXPENSIVE GOING UP AND PICKING
THESE THINGS UP AND ADMINISTERING GIVING THEM BACK
TO THE COMPANIES IT’S GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE. SO WE NEED TO DO
IT RIGHT. MY FIRST MOTION IS I THINK WE HAVE A WAY OF DOING IT
RIGHT AND THAT’S BECAUSE OUR BIKE SHARE SYSTEM HAS DOCKS AND
PUT IN PLACES WHERE STUFF FITS. THEY’RE DIFFICULT TO SITE THESE
DOCKS BUT MANAGED TO PUT A LOT OF THEM OUT. WE MIGHT HAVE A
GREAT WAY OF AVOIDING THE PROBLEM THAT EVERY OTHER
MUNICIPALITY IS STRUGGLING WITH. I’M ADDING THAT JUST FOR
CONSIDERATION I’M NOT SAYING DO IT, I’M SAYING TALK TO TPA.
THEN THE ELIMINATION OF STANDING WAS IF SOMEONE’S STANDING NEXT
TO THEIR E-SCOOTER, THAT’S PROBABLY OKAY ON SIDEWALK. IT’S
WHEN THEY LEAVE IT THAT THE PROBLEM IS INITIATED. BUT I
WANT TO MAKE SURE WE MAKE RIGHT CLEAR AS A COMMITTEE, WE’RE IN A
TIME CRUNCH HERE. SO WE HAVEN’T HAD A LOT TIME TO THINK THIS
THROUGH OR CONSULT WITH THE PUBLIC WHICH PROBLEMATIC BECAUSE
WE MIGHT NOT BE SEEING WHAT THE FINAL SOLUTION SHOULD BE. SO I
WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYONE HERE ENCOURAGE THE MEDIA AND ALL
OTHER COUNCILLORS NOT TO START SHARPENING THEIR — THEIR SPIKES
ON THEIR SCOOTERS QUITE YET. WE HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK
AT THIS TO SEE IF WE GET IT RIGHT GOING INTO COUNCIL. THAT
WE COULD ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF NOT OPENING UP THE SIDEWALKS TO
ALL SHARING TECHNOLOGIES RIOT AWAY DEPENDING ON THE
REGULATIONS BUT ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF PERSONAL USE BECAUSE
THEY ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE THESE ELECTRONIC SCOOTERS
ALREADY IT’S JUST NOT CLEAR THEY COULD ACTUALLY USE THEM
ANYWHERE. SO I JUST THINK WE’VE GOT SOME TIME BETWEEN NOW AND
COUNCIL IF WE ALL KEEP AN OPEN MIND. LISTEN TO OUR
CONSTITUENTS, LISTEN TO CITY STAFF. WE MAY LAND ON A
DIFFERENT POINT THAN WE ARE AT THIS SECOND. BUT I THANK THE
CHAIR AND STAFF FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD. THE PROVINCE IS BEING
A LITTLE UNFAIR IN WAY THEY’RE TREATING US.
>>THANK YOU, COUNCILLOR LAYTON. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? I WOULD
JUST SIMPLY SAY THAT I WAS IN DENVER IN PAST SUMMER WHICH IS
AN AVID LOCATION FOR E-SCOOTERS. AND I SAW MANY OF THE BENEFITS
OF E-SCOOTERS OF GETTING PEOPLE AROUND IN AN ECONOMICAL AND
ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY WAY. AND YET I ALSO SAW SOME OF THE
DOWNSIDE WHERE PEOPLE WERE LEAVING SCOOTERS TIPPED OVER,
BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK, BLOCKING THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. BUT I
MUST ADMIT AS A CITY WITH LOTS OF BIKE PATHS AND TRAILS AND
COMMITMENT TO THAT KIND OF MOBILITY, IT WAS ACTUALLY VERY
EXCITING. WE WERE STAYING NEAR UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, IT WAS VERY
EXCITING TO SEE ALL THESE PEOPLE ON SCOOTERS, CREATED A VIBRANCY IN THE CITY. IT WAS
FOR MANY THE LAST MILE TO EITHER DESTINATION OF WORK OR HOME.
AND I THOUGHT IT WAS — I THOUGHT IT WAS QUITE NEAT
ACTUALLY. BUT I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE PERSONAL INJURIES THAT
I’VE READ ABOUT ON THESE I TOOK ONE FOR A TEST DRIVE. AND THEY
DO GO 23569. AND YOU REALLY HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO CONTROL THE
BREAKING SYSTEM — BRAKING SYSTEM AS WELL AS THE GAS. AND
YOU ALSO HAVE TO BE AWARE OF WHERE YOU’RE [INAUDIBLE] AND
THAT’S GOING TO BECOME A MAJOR ISSUE. IF THESE MOTIONS ARE
GOING TO CARRY TODAY EVERYONE’S MIND REALLY JUST TO CARRIAGE OF
IT FROM STAFF, I THINK IF THESE MOTION PASS WE’RE GOING TO HYPER
REGULATE IT RIGHT OUT OF THE CITY. I DON’T KNOW HOW THESE
COMPANIES COULD EVERY FUNCTION HERE. AND YOU’LL SEE IT IN
SMALL POCKETS. MAYBE IN PRIVATE PROPERTY LIKE THE DISTILLERY
DISTRICT MAYBE ON FEDERAL LANDS LIKE DOWNSVIEW PARK AND MAYBE A
FEW OTHER LOCATIONS BUT I CAN’T SEE ANY OTHER PRIVATE SECTOR
OPERATING OR AGREEING TO THESE CONDITIONS OR HAVING IT FEASIBLE
IN ANY WAY. BUT THESE ARE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MAYBE WE CAN
— I SPOKE TO COUNCILLOR LAYTON OFF LINE AND CERTAINLY CAN WORK
ON THESE AS WE GO FORWARD. SO THE ONE MOTION I HAVE IS
COUNCILLOR LAYTON AND THEN THE MAIN ITEM. SO IF WE PUT THAT ON
THE SCREEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?>>HOLD ON. WE’RE GOING TO
SEPARATE THEM OUT. >> YES, WE COULD. WE COULD.
>> [MULTIPLE SPEAKERS]. >>SO RECOMMENDATION 1 WE’LL TAKE FIRST. COUNCILLOR PERRUZZA, ARE
YOU READY TO VOTE? YEAH, OKAY. SO RECOMMENDATION 1
IS OBVIOUSLY AN AMENDMENT TO WHAT WE HAD IN THE ORIGINAL
MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED.
RECOMMENDATION 2 IS A SLIGHT AMENDMENT TO WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY
PROPOSED, I DELETED WITHSTANDING. ALL THOSE IN
FAVOR? OPPOSED? THAT IS CARRIED. AND THE ITEM AS
AMENDED, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? OPPOSED? CAN YOU DO THAT VOTE
AGAIN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THAT IS CARRIED. WELL THANK YOU
VERY MUCH EVERYBODY. ENJOY THE REST OF THE DAY. AND THE REST
OF THE SUMMER.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *