Details

Bob Forrest's monstrous application for a condo in the heart of Newmarket's historic downtown could be on its way back.

Forrest put the Clock Tower up for sale in June last year but the last time I checked the Land Registry (in February 2015) his outfit, Main Street Clock Inc, was still the registered owner.

A report on the Town's servicing allocations (the policy that prioritizes new developments for hooking up to water and sewage) is coming up to Monday's Committee of the Whole.

We learn that a revised application on the Clock Tower "is anticipated". It is given priority 2 - the same as Glenway (minus the club house town houses which are recommended for immediate allocation from the Town's current strategic reserve) and higher than Slessor (3) where the planners are "awaiting a development application".

The anticipated development application for the Clock Tower is now down to 140 units. But why should this speculative development even feature in the queue when Forrest's last application was roundly condemned as a gross overdevelopment in the middle of a sensitive conservation area?

And here it is, back again. In February 2014 Chris Bobyk told us it was impossible to make the development work with fewer than 150 units.

Clearly, that was total cobblers.

But why have the planners recommended making a provisional allocation for 140 units? Given the history of this application with all its twists and turns, we need their detailed reasons.

By allocating the Clock Tower "Priority 2" the Town's senior planning staff - whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers not the developers - are telling us they believe the Clock Tower "could receive Council approval in 2015".

This is utterly preposterous.

A giant condo on Main Street South is not a priority for water and sewage allocation - nor for anything else.

Update on 15 April 2015. John Taylor successfully moves motion at the Committee of the Whole on 13 April 2015 removing from the servicing allocation report the priority categories 2 and 3 for sewage and water hook-ups for new developments pending a review later in the year. He specifically mentions the Clock Tower where a revised application has yet to be submitted.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

Details

York Region hesitantly dipped its toe into the internet age eleven months ago when it announced Council meetings would in future be live streamed between 9.30am and the close of the meeting. There is an audio feed - but no video – which is available on the day of the meeting at www.york.ca/live.

Committee meetings are not streamed at all even though this is where much of the debate (which is often cursory) takes place.

Listening to politicians at work but not seeing their faces is straight out of the 1950s and needs to change immediately. If tiny municipalities across Canada can video stream (and keep a video library of meetings) there is absolutely no reason why York Region should drag its feet.

I’d like to see Newmarket’s Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, who spent the last election banging on about super-fast broadband, stir himself and get onto this.

To other matters… the agenda for tomorrow’s Committee of the Whole includes an item on the Region’s Transportation Master Plan. The crucial issue here is how the Region’s plans dovetail with Provincial initiatives, especially Metrolinx’s work on all-day two-way GO trains on the Barrie corridor. What precisely is the Region doing to help make this happen?

Elsewhere on the agenda I see more gazing into the crystal ball, this time forecasting the Region’s population and employment in 2041.

York’s planners are now telling us that Newmarket’s population in 2031 (as forecast by the Regional Official Plan in 2010) will hit 97,100. The population in 2041 could be 107,000; 112,400 or 114,900 depending on the amount of “intensification”.

Less than 18 months ago, the Town’s expensive external consultant, the famed planning guru Ruth Victor, was telling us with a straight face that “for 2031, the projected growth is estimated at 116,521 people as per the secondary plan process currently in progress.”

Personally, I think we should consult chicken entrails.

 

Details

York Region’s Employment and Industry Report 2014 created a huge storm of controversy last month when it claimed Newmarket had seen a miniscule growth of 100 jobs over the period 2009-2014 while, next door, Aurora added a useful 5, 700 new jobs.

After uncharacteristically animated protests from Newmarket’s Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, and Regional Councillor, John Taylor, the report was sent back to staff for further “consultation with municipalities” and the re-worked version is coming up on Thursday 9 April at the Region’s Committee of the Whole.

Lo and behold, the new figures show an increase in Newmarket jobs from 100 to 570, though, sadly, the Town remains bottom of the league for job creation.

In order to boost the numbers, planning staff stripped out assumptions about job growth in those businesses they failed to contact by survey (19%) and those who refused to participate (1%).  Staff also excluded figures for home and farm based businesses. In Newmarket it had been assumed 100 people were employed in agriculture and 3,200 worked at home.

Across York Region in the five-year period in question, job growth was revised downwards from 77,000 to 71,910. You can read the revised report by clicking on “documents” in the panel top left and navigating to York Region.

The re-worked Table 5 gives employment by municipality 2004-2014. It retains a column for job growth 2009-2014 showing the new figures. An additional column gives 2014 “Activity Rates” measuring “the relationship between jobs and residents within a community”. This is calculated by dividing total employment by total population.

In this case, the figures include assumptions made about non-contactable businesses, farm and home working.

Will this tweaking be enough to satisfy the Mayor and Regional Councillor? Or will we see another blustering challenge to the new revised figures?

I doubt it. My money is on no debate at all.

The original #100 jobs figure was deeply embarrassing.

On Thursday, I suspect the caravan will move on, in silence.

Low Incomes in York Region

The Region’s Committee of the Whole will also be considering a report on low incomes.

We learn that 10.8% of Newmarket residents were on low incomes in 2012.

But the report tells us the majority of people on low incomes in York Region - about 84% - live in the three southern local municipalities of Markham, Richmond Hill and Vaughan.

Low incomes are defined as

“income levels that are 50% of the Canadian after tax median income adjusted for family size and age of children. As an example, in 2012 the LIM-AT was $16,968 for a single person, $33,936 for a couple family with two children under 16 and $35,633 for a couple family with one child over 16 and one under 16.”

(Median income is simply mid point between the highest and lowest incomes.)

The report also tells us there has been a growth in so-called “precarious employment” with full time jobs, as a share of total employment, shrinking to 73.5% from 77.6% in 2003.

You can read the full report by clicking on “Documents” in the panel top left and navigating to York Region.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

Details

The minutes of decisions taken by Municipalities serve a number of useful purposes – but illumination and elucidation of the matter under discussion is clearly not one of them.

On 5 March 2015 at York Region’s Committee of the Whole, Tony Van Bynen and John Taylor affected shock at the revelation that Newmarket had seen a derisory increase of 100 jobs over the five year period 2009-14 when the Region as a whole had added 77,000 jobs. They wanted Newmarket staff to do a double-check.

The story ignited quite the media firestorm. It was just as well I was sitting in the rafters, quietly observing things.

A report of that meeting is going up to York Region Council next week (26 March).

Anyone relying on the Minutes as written would have no inkling what was behind the obscure reference to “further consultation with local municipalities”.

If there is any merit in Minutes placing a decision in some kind of context (and I think there is), the Minutes could be amended by adding my words (below) in italics. I’ve spared the Mayor’s blushes by leaving out any reference to Newmarket.

12.  York Region Employment and Industry Report 2014

Committee of the Whole recommends:

1.  Receipt of the presentation by Doug Lindeblom, Director, Economic Strategy & Tourism and Paul Bottomley, Manager, Policy, Research and Forecasting.

2. Referral of the report dated February 24, 2015 from the Commissioner of Corporate Services and Chief Planner to a future meeting of the Committee to allow for further consultation with local municipalities who are invited to review the methodology used in the Report and to verify or recommend amending the number of jobs created by municipality over the period 2009-2014.

President Di Muccio

An interesting item on the agenda catches my eye. Former councillor Maddie Di Muccio, now reincarnated as President of the York Region Taxpayers Coalition, will be addressing the Regional Council meeting next Thursday (26 March) on municipal transparency and accountability. I am left wondering how this event will be recorded for posterity.

Elsewhere…  I see that Newmarket councillors' expenses come up for scrutiny at the Town’s Committee of the Whole on Monday (23 March). Just my own view, but it seems to me President Di Muccio shouldn’t be financing personal vendettas using these “taxpayer dollars” we keep hearing about.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

Details

Almost a year ago, former councillors Maddie Di Muccio and Chris Emanuel called for a meeting to consider the lessons to be learned from the Glenway disaster.

When, if ever, is this issue going to be addressed?

We were told in January 2015 that a report would go to councillors by the end of March setting out the “process”.  Councillors discussed some of the modalities on 2 February 2015 but no decisions were taken and everything was left up in the air.

We are still none the wiser on what the process will be or what the format will look like.

Tucked away, yet again, in the list of outstanding items on the Agenda for the Committee of the Whole on Monday 23 March 2015 is item 5 (Marianneville Developments) reminding everyone that Council on 5 May 2014 directed staff to organise a public meeting.

Item 5 tells us that a “facilitated public meeting is to be arranged” and that the matter will come back to the Committee of the Whole sometime before the end of June.

It is all far too leisurely.

Why can’t our councillors press for details – and give staff notice that they are going to do this? 

A little bit of urgency may help our neighbours in Aurora who are facing their own Glenway – the redevelopment of the former golf course at Highland Gate.

The Planning Opinion prepared for Highland Gate Developments Inc and submitted to the Town of Aurora cites the Glenway precedent:

The subject site presents a unique opportunity adjacent to an existing stable residential neighbourhood. As provided for by the OMB decision for the Glenway Golf Club site in Newmarket, there is no test of need to support intensification within the built boundary in the PPS and Growth Plan and therefore the policies contained in Section 3.3 should be interpreted as a directive of where growth ought to go, and not be restrictive in terms of the location and amount of intensification.

Although the subject site has not been identified as an area for intensification in the Official Plan, it represents a viable option for general intensification due to its location within both the built-boundary (utilizing existing municipal services) and settlement area, adjacent to the Yonge Street Regional Corridor. This is in keeping with the general policy intent of the Growth Plan and the YROP that intensification is to occur generally within the built-up areas of municipalities; while there are areas specifically identified and recognized by the Region and Town for intensification, this does not limit intensification to those areas.

History, it seems, is about to repeat itself. Chris Ballard MPP, take note.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

  • You are here:  
  • Home