David Juliusson has been a resident of Long Branch for 20 years. What attracted him to the community is being close to the water and the opportunities for walking and cycling that are available in the area. David has always had a passion for history.

He worked for 32 years as Program Officer at Historic Fort York. Generations of schoolchildren gained knowledge about the War of 1812 and Toronto’s history from David.

Upon retirement, David began a second career as a letter carrier at Canada Post. In his spare time, he is an avid cyclist who likes to explore the city.

As part of his community involvement, David Juliusson wrote the following emails on the Lake Promenade Co-Tenancy Project.

From: David Juliusson <djuliussn@hotmail.com>
Sent: 23 juillet 2024 15:12
To: Councillor Morley <Councillor_Morley@toronto.ca>
Cc: Matt Cook <Matt.Cook@toronto.ca>; Eno (Rebecca) Udoh-Orok <Eno.Udoh-Orok@toronto.ca>
Subject: I am expressing my opposition to 220 Lake Promenade Proposal

To Councilor Morley:

I was at the latest meeting (July 4th, 2024) about this planned development. I wholeheartedly agreed with the members of the working group who stated the proposal is too tall, too dense and will be detrimental to the neighbourhood. The applicants made changes but didn’t deal with the core issue. But I have a new objection.

Last Tuesday (July 16, 2024), we had a major rain. My neighbours on both sides are having to go through their insurance because there as so much water. Many others within proximity of the proposal are in the same predicament. It can be argued that this was a once in a lifetime storm, but we went through ones just as bad in 2009 and 2013. The city own statistics are clear that we will get more water in the future. It is an effect of global warming. We will be getting more of them.

So what helps mitigate the effects of such a storm. Trees and green spaces to help absorb the water. We have much less than we did in 2009 because of all the lot splitting that has been allowed in Long Branch. Many of us have poor soil. My lot is clay. It is the stuff used in pool liners. The larger lots absorbed much more water.

The proposal will make flooding much worse than it was last week.  Many trees that currently absorb huge amounts of will be cut down. Large amounts of the green spaces will be paved over, meaning it will simply keep the water on the surface. Where will this excess water go? To the neighbours who already have flooding problems.

Yours sincerely,

David Juliusson

1 Park Blvd

_____

From: David Juliusson <djuliussn@hotmail.com>
Sent: 15 juillet 2023 22:13
To: Councillor Morley <Councillor_Morley@toronto.ca>

Cc: Matt Cook <Matt.Cook@toronto.ca>; Eno (Rebecca) Udoh-Orok <Eno.Udoh-Orok@toronto.ca>; Gérard Lévesque <levesque.gerard@sympatico.ca>; Martin Peter <pmartin13@hotmail.com>;
Subject: Concerns and questions after todays meeting about 22- Lake Promenade

To Councillor Morley

Thank you for holding today’s meeting. It shows clearly that the residents are very concerned and opposed to the plan put forward. It will forever alter our community and not in a good way.

Your office asked that we send our questions and concerns. Here are mine.

Thank you for holding today’s meeting. As a community we need more public meetings on this topic. It will forever change the Long Branch and South Etobicoke Community.

As per your suggestions to write after the meeting, I have questions and concerns I want answered.

1. What is the rationale for the building having reached the end of its life? I asked this question of the city building expert. He said concrete buildings can easily last over 100 years. These buildings are solid concrete.

– there should be a city building engineer to inspect the building and make a report on the building conditions.

– Jack Greennberg himself said the buildings have reached the end of their operational life at the July 5 meeting at the Legion. No city representative contradicted him.

– the High Park neighbourhood has a number of  concrete buildings that are older. They are considered in good condition and nobody is talking about tearing them down because they have reached the end of their useful existence. I understand why the owner wants them to come down. What is the city rationale?

2. Do these buildings have asbestos in them? If so how will the city ensure this and other harmful substances are transported safely out of our residential community?

– the city needs to do the inspection for asbestos and other hazardous materials. We should not trust the data provided by the developer on this point.

3. Our neighbourhood has a big problem with water. After big storms there is flooding. Parts of Lake Promenade flood. The parking garages and lockers in the buildings  also flood.

– how will flooding be mitigated especially with the removal of so many trees? Will we get a natural green solution or an engineered one?

– At the bottom of 33^rd St on the property in question is a swale. It is there because it handles much of the water coming down 33^rd  and Park Blvd. It will be removed completely to build the extension of 33^rd St. What will absorb the water?

– At the proposed corner of 33rd and Chapel will be a new public square. Currently, the ground there is grass which adsorbs water. It will be replaced by impermeable materials that do not. What will absorb the water?

– is the city responsible for all these new costs?

4. There will be new sidewalks on Chapel Road and 33^rd Will these be considered part of the green space?
5. The developer is claiming that the tenants will have the same sized units they currently have. The tenants are currently in 5 seven storey buildings. That is 35 storeys. They will be housed in 2 twelve storey buildings. That is 24 storeys. How can the same floor space be provided in 2/3 of the number of storeys? Does this mean the buildings will occupy a larger footprint as well as being taller than we currently see?

– can it be put in writing that tenants get the same sized unit?

6. As community members pointed out there are already a large number of cars parked on the city streets. At 1 PM, Lake Promenade was full. There were already cars parked on both sides of 33^rd St effectively making it a one way road. By dusk it will be full for at least two blocks because of the lack of parking in the current buildings. Yet this road will supposedly handle a marked increase in vehicular traffic. How will that work?

– will city bylaw officers enforce the parking bylaws on our local streets? They don’t currently on a regular basis.

7. There will be 400% increase in residents in this development alone. There will be marked other increases at the Marino site plus with the changes to the Multiplex laws. Yet we have a small neighbourhood library and an old arena as our only public spaces. The July 5 meeting had to held at the Legion. Will we get some needed public amenties for our neighbourhood? What do we as a community gain from these changes?
8. The corner of 33^rd and Marina meets all the requirements for a traffic camera to give out tickets. It is the pedestrian entrance to a school that has an active mandate to encourage children to walk and cycle to school. Will one be installed?

-Since 31^st is a community safety zone where cars regularly greatly exceed the speed limit going north and has a school on it could we expect a traffic camera there too?

9. What will this development do for the property values of its neighbours?
10. This area is a major migratory path for birds and monarch butterflies. Colonel Sam Smith Park is a known site for them. Yet these buildings are being built on their migratory path. What is being done to help them?
11. This Ward was known for the amounts of Section 37 money given in lieu of providing public green space or amenities. The result is the Humber Bay Shores. Where is all that money? Can some of it be used to help our community?

Yours sincerely.

David Juliusson

1 Park Blvd

_________

From: David Juliusson <djuliussn@hotmail.com>
Sent: 15 juillet 2023 18:28
To: Matt Cook <Matt.Cook@toronto.ca>; Eno (Rebecca) Udoh-Orok <Eno.Udoh-Orok@toronto.ca>
Cc : Councillor Morley <Councillor_Morley@toronto.ca>; Gérard Lévesque <levesque.gerard@sympatico.ca>; Paloma Woods <paloma_woods@hotmail.com>; William Brayden Woods <brayden_woods@hotmail.com>; Mike Gardner <mikeygsmail@gmail.com>; Dinarte Bairos <dinartebairos@yahoo.ca>
Subject: The traffic at the corner of 31st and Park Blvd

Good afternoon, Matt

I attended the site walking tour about 220 Lake Promenade today. While there I told you about the problem of the traffic at the corner of 31^st and Park Blvd. You told me to write a formal letter about it.

It is a dangerous intersection Two of the three directions have stop signs. Cars coming north on 31^st do not. They come north around a blind corner onto Park Blvd or else keep heading north.

The stop sign on Park Blvd is treated like a suggested stop. Many cars slow down and do a rolling stop but not completely. They go slow and then accelerate. Many others simply keep going. You saw that yourself today.

On top of this, pedestrians going from Park Blvd onto the sidewalk going onto 31^st have to cross in the same place as the cars coming around the blind corner. Thia ia important because James S. Bell school is at the top of the street. The school is a Sports and Wellness Academy. It has a specific mandate to encourage their students to walk and cycle to school. Large numbers of students do. Beyond this the day care students go on walking trips to the cenotaph to visit the heritage tree.

With the increased numbers in our neighbourhood, it is not a safe intersection. I believe it is a good location for a traffic circle. The space is wide enough. The only other solution would be a third stop sign on the north side of 31^st St.

I hope you are serious about wanting my comment. It is an intersection that needs to be fixed. It is too bad it could not have been done in conjunction with the work being done on 31^st right now but I hope it can be made safer.

Yours sincerely,

David Juliusson

1 Park Blvd.

—————

From: David Juliusson <djuliussn@hotmail.com>
Sent: 8 juillet 2023 15:11
To: Councillor Morley <Councillor_Morley@toronto.ca>
Cc: Eno (Rebecca) Udoh-Orok <Eno.Udoh-Orok@toronto.ca>; Matt Cook <Matt.Cook@toronto.ca>
Subject: The issue of shadow studies on my solar panels

Good afternoon, Councilor Morley

At the July 5 meeting, I approached you afterwards. The shadow study from the 220 Lake Promenade project is clear. I will have a shadow over my property. I have solar panels.

When my neighbours built their home over the allowable density, they were made to prove that their increased height would not impact my solar panels. The Committee of Adjustment delayed their project until they were able to do so.

In this case, there is zero concern by the developer of solar panels in the neighbourhood. I am not the only person affected. Why are they allowed to affect my solar panels?

You asked me to write you directly to ask this question. Are they allowed to block the sunlight to my solar panels? They obviously believe so. What is the city position on this issue?

David Juliusson

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

From: David Juliusson <djuliussn@hotmail.com>
Sent: May 20, 2023 10:47
To: Councillor Amber Morley <Councillor_Morley@toronto.ca>
Cc : Martin Peter <pmartin13@hotmail.com>; Gérard Lévesque <levesque.gerard@sympatico.ca>; William Brayden Woods <brayden_woods@hotmail.com>; Paloma Woods <paloma_woods@hotmail.com>; ecostuff04@yaho o.ca; Long Branch Neighbourhood Association <longbranchnato@gmail.com>; Steven Carson <scarson@pathcom.com>; Tim Dobson <timothy_dobson@yahoo.com>; Peggy Moulder <pmoulder100@gmail.com>; Al Rezoski <Al.Rezoski@toronto.ca>; Matt Cook <Matt.Cook@toronto.ca>; Keir Matthews-Hunter <Keir.Matthews-Hunter@toronto.ca>; Eno (Rebecca) Udoh-Orok <Eno.Udoh-Orok@toronto.ca>; ec Trejis <ed.toronto@gmail.com>; Ted Mann <mannt067@gmail.com>; Paul Young <paul@tallman.ca>; Pam Gough <pgough@sympatico.ca>; Trustee Patrick Nunziata <patrick.nunziata@tdsb.on.ca>; Jaan Pill <jpill@preservedstories.com>; Ken Tilden <tildenl@sympatico.ca>; Brian MacLean <brianpmaclean@gmail.com>

Subject : I believe you should hold a community meeting on the development of www.toronto.ca/220Lake Promenade

To Councillor Amber Morley.

My name is David Juliusson. I live at 1 Park Blvd. I will be directly affected by this proposed development. I believe you should hold an in-person meeting for the community.

I know about the online June 27 meeting. We should be able to hold an in-person meeting. Online meetings were great during the pandemic but it is not the same as being able to attend in person. Moreover, many of the people most affected are not able to attend virtual meetings. Many of the residents of the buildings are elderly, have disabilities and are not computer literate. They will not be represented by a virtual meeting.

I believe the meeting should be held at the Assembly Hall. It is a city facility that will provide the space to a councillor should she request it. It is the only space near us that is big enough. The Long Branch Neighbourhood Association (LBNA) held a meeting at the Legion. It was pulled together in a mere matter of days and was standing room only. I believe an in-person meeting at the Assembly Hall will be the largest community meeting you have ever held.

I understand Senior City Planner Eno Udok-Oro feels Planning cannot hold a meeting in six weeks.  But you can. You can tell Planning to show up at the meeting and make the materials readily available to the public. I don’t understand how a local volunteer community group can pull together such a meeting in days, yet the paid professional city staff are unable to do so in six weeks.

There are multiple documents. Many of them quite technical. The developers have had years to prepare these 41 documents. They have lawyers, architects, and other professionals to familiarize themselves with this proposal. We, as the community, have none of that.  I cannot hope to have the competence that the developers have. Neither can our local community. We need to rely on the city professionals to help us. The fact that Eno feels they cannot hold a meeting for us at such short notice leaves us at a disadvantage. You can use your office to help us.

I believe this proposal is something unique and, therefore, precedent setting for the entire city. I can’t think of a single place in Toronto that has allowed 2000+ units to be built in the middle of an established neighbourhood.

I will briefly mention two documents. The first is the Transportation Impact Study (292 pages). I found it interesting that 33^rd Street was looked at in the month of August 2022. Because of schools being closed and people on vacation, it is probably the time that streets have the least traffic. To move the increased traffic from the site, we will have an extension of an existing single lane each way street. 33^rd Street already has cars parked on both sides most days, effectively making it a one-lane road at many points. Long Branch Avenue is already busy at the Lake Shore Blvd West traffic light because of the high volume of vehicles from the townhouses north of Lake Shore. This will increase as the townhouses on the former Marino site get built. 33^rd Street will be full. Trucks and cars will come up to a stop sign which is the back entrance to James S. Bell Junior Middle Sports and Wellness Academy.

I have not read entirely the Transportation Impact Study but it seems to me to be self-evident. No new infrastructure combined with a major increase in traffic equals congestion. I am not even looking at the effects of the forthcoming Lakeview Development will have on Lakeshore Blvd. and the GO Transit.

As for other forms of traffic, Lake Promenade is a designated part of the Waterfront Trail. For pedestrians, we don’t even have sidewalks beyond the proposed site on both Park Blvd going West or Lake Promenade going East.

The second document is the November 30, 2022 Sun/Shadow Study. It is done on all four equinoxes (March, June, September and December), which are proper time to do them. I find it troubling. I have solar panels on my house and will definitely be in shadow from the new buildings whereas I currently have none. Indeed, on the winter equinox, the shadow will extend all the way to 25^th Street. This is from the developers own shadow study.

My comments do not even cover other city concerns. Where will children go to school? Will it be local or will they have to be bused like at Humber Bay Shores? The Toronto District School Board (TDSB) has a Safe Routes to School mandate. How will this increased traffic affect children walking and biking to school? Major sewer work is being done in the area right now. 33^rd Street just finished, 31^st is being done now. Who will pay for the increased sewer work needed for this project as well as other needed infrastructure?  Only the city professionals can answer these sorts of questions for us. I believe you, as our Ward Councillor, can help us get some of the answers.

Compten Management Inc. is holding a meeting for the tenants only. I believe you should be at the meeting as should Ken Matthews and Eno Udok-Orok.

Finally, this development proposal will forever alter the community of Long Branch. I believe, if it is allowed, that the Mimico Estates will immediately put in a similar proposal. That means all three southern communities of your ward will be altered beyond recognition. For those of us who have made this our home, we deserve a chance to have our questions answered and to gain information from the city professionals working on this case.  That can only be provided at an in-person community meeting. You can give us that opportunity.

Yours sincerely,

David Juliusson

1 Park Blvd.