Details

The Town confirmed on Monday 9 January that it had received notice of an appeal to the OMB by the developer Bob Forrest following its widely applauded decision to reject the proposed redevelopment of the Clock Tower lands in the heart of the heritage conservation district.

I am told the Town is currently processing the appeal

"and will be submitting it to the OMB later this month".

The developer's deadline for triggering an appeal was Thursday 5 January.

The Town says it has 15 days in which to forward the notice of appeal and its response which would take us to the end of next week.

I suspect Forrest's appeal will pick up on the points raised is his intemperate letter to the Mayor and Councillors of 28 November 2016. (Scroll to last item in page 2 and open.) He will no doubt bang on about delays in processing the application. The points he is likely to make can all be easily dealt with.

For its part, the Town says with simplicity and admirable clarity that the application was rejected on 5 December 2016 because:

"the development of the subject lands as proposed would adversely impact the character of the established neighbourhood and adjacent properties within the Heritage Conservation District".

I expect the Staff's proposed response to Forrest's OMB appeal will be formally approved by councillors - and amended if necessary.

In any event, we know the Town's opposition to Forrest's plans is not going to change. Tony Van Trappist admitted as much when he told the Committee of the Whole meeting on 28 November 2016 (after it had rejected the Forrest application) that

"we will be guided by the decision of the majority of this Council."

Van Trappist was, of course, the only member of Council to support the staff's amended version of Forrest's application. The decision to reject the original Forrest application was unanimous.

Forrest's letter, setting out the detailed reasons for his appeal to the OMB, and the Town's response, will be essential reading for anyone seeking Party or Participant status at the OMB Hearing.

All this material should be posted on the Town's website at the same time it is sent down to the OMB in Toronto.

Even if Forrest were to win the OMB Appeal (the chances of which are vanishingly remote) what would he have achieved?

He still won't be able to develop the Clock Tower as proposed because he needs Town owed land which will never in a thousand years be forthcoming.

For me, this is the enduring mystery.

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

Details

My spies tell me the trial date has now been set for 10 February 2017 at the Small Claims Court in Newmarket.

At long last the end of this ludicrous psycho drama is in sight.

Di Muccio's allegations of abuse of power, targeted malice and intentional infliction of mental suffering are totally absurd and risible. And then there are the claims of injurious falsehoods and breach of confidence and breach of privacy. 

It has always been my view that the Courts should never be used to settle old political scores.   

When she is not litigating, former Newmarket councillor, Matilde Di Muccio, is hard at work seeking the PC nomination for Newmarket-Aurora for the next Provincial election in 2018. The last time she went for the nomination she was blocked by the then PC leader, Tim Hudak, who believed she was sub-standard material.

It beats me why she, a PC parliamentary hopeful, still includes on her website an ancient testimonial from Liberal Leader Kathleen Wynne:

"Maddie is an intelligent, passionate and able woman who will be a great addition to Newmarket's Town Hall. Her community experience, her leadership skills and her drive to bring positive change to those around her will make her a strong Town councillor. Her no-nonsense approach to problems will make her a leader."

These days, Di Muccio doesn't think much of Kathleen Wynne who said such nice things about her in the past - before she (Di Muccio) was elected.

Di Muccio sneaked on to Newmarket Council in 2010 with a majority of 37, taking 27.5% of the vote. After four years, the electors in Ward 6 had had enough and kicked her out, her share of the vote dropping to 24.6%.

Anyway... Maddie now insists:

"After 13 years of Dalton McGuinty and Kathleen Wynne it's time for a new direction..."

If Maddie floods the riding association with new paper members and, against all the odds, gets the nomination everything will go south.

That will be the new direction.

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

Details

Plans to redevelop the Hollingsworth Arena site have disappeared in a puff of smoke.  

FivefortheDrive today tweets that the swashbuckling developer, Sandro Sementilli, has defaulted on his mortgage on 693 Davis Drive, posting an image of the repossession notice at the property.   

The developer's San Michael Homes website has vanished into thin air.

A report to Newmarket's Committee of the Whole on 18 October 2016 on Hollingsworth was unexpectedly pulled from the agenda. (See item 4)

The Town's Chief Administrative Officer, Bob Shelton, told councillors there had been changes to the agenda:

“Item 4 regarding San Michael Homes and (the) Hollingsworth property has been withdrawn and will come forward along with the signed letter of intent when that is ready. It should come together.”

Given what we now know, a signed letter of intent isn't going to be coming any time soon.

I blogged about the Hollingsworth saga over a year ago. The presentation and the artwork from the developer's architect Harry Kohn clearly showed two towers. 

But when Mr Sementilli made his unforgettable partnership pitch to councillors on 20 October 2015 he only ever mentioned one tower.

I remarked at the time that, curiously, no-one picked him up on this.

Newmarket's Mayor Tony Van Bynen told the ERA newspaper that

“Yes, this project is not without risk … but we would be doing our residents a disservice if we did not explore these opportunities to the fullest.”

Perhaps we shall all be told in due course how and why it all went pear-shaped.

It would be nice to know.

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

 

Details

Bob Forrest has until Thursday 5 January 2017 to file an appeal to the OMB against Newmarket Council's decision to refuse his seven storey Clock Tower development on Main Street.

On 5 December 2016 councillors threw out Forrest's proposal on the grounds the

"development of the subject lands as proposed would adversely impact the character of the established neighbourhood and adjacent properties within the Heritage Conservation District".

The Mayor, Tony Van Trappist, voted against Forrest's original application and for the staff's so-called compromise. He was in a minority of one.

The Mayor, reading from a prepared script, told the Committee of the Whole on 28 November 2016:

"I appreciate the concerns that many people have expressed about the scale and the impact of this development in our Heritage Conservation District and I believe that staff has proposed a significantly reduced option from what was originally proposed. And whether we agree with the recommendations or not this is a very comprehensive report that has been thoroughly examined."

"All of the elements, too, have been considered including an extensive heritage impact assessment from a qualified heritage specialist, Goldsmith Borgal and Co. And it was peer reviewed independently by heritage architects. It is their opinion that the revisions proposed would meet the intentions of the Heritage Conservation District and I agree."

The role of the "heritage experts" will now, inevitably, come under scrutiny.

Van Bynen leans on the opinions and recommendations of professional experts like a crutch, unwilling or unable to exercise his own critical faculties.

His role in the Clock Tower drama has yet to be written. Was he a spectator to events - as is so often the case - or was he the guiding hand?

Forrest already has an appeal lodged with the OMB where it has been sleeping for over three years. Forrest appealed By-law 2013-51 (establishing the Heritage Conservation District) arguing his properties should be exempt.

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

 

Details

What is this all about and why is it important? Live video streaming of York Region meetings could be more than a year away because there is no funding for it in next year's Budget. The current chair, Wayne Emmerson, doesn't like the cameras so he sabotaged moves to get live streaming up and running sooner rather than later. So there will be no news clips on television in 2017 from the Council Chamber informing us what the region is up to. Screens across all media platforms will be blank. And in 2018, for the first time ever, there will be a hugely important region-wide election for the regional chair. Now read on...

This morning York Regional Council approved a Budget which includes total operational spending of $2,097 million in 2017. Capital spending is budgeted to be $942 million next year with projected capital spending of $6.1 billion out to 2026.

By any measure, York Region is a behemoth when it comes to spending.

So it is more than unfortunate there is no video record of who said what. There is a live audio feed - a rather quaint innovation which, for Committees, is barely three months old. When the meeting is over the plug is pulled and what was said disappears into the ether forever.

But that is going to change. The Region has decided in principle to video stream. The question is when?

Sleeping on the job

We need live video streaming now - and a searchable archive to see who sleeps on the job, contributing nothing to the debates.

As it happens, a report on video streaming for Council and Committee meetings is on the agenda today but it pulls its punches. We are told amendments to the Municipal Act currently before the legislative assembly may

"permit Council members to participate electronically in public meetings"

and

"if the amendment is enacted, additional renovations to the Council Chamber might be required to allow for electronic participation. There is the potential to reduce overall renovation costs for the Council Chamber f the video streaming and electronic participation renovations are completed at the same time."

You wanted a cadillac

Wayne Emmerson, the Regional Chair, didn't get to where he is today by relying on fancy technology. Or a pretty face.  He did it the hard way. Making deals and stitching things up. 

He tells his startled colleagues that the cost of installing video streaming would be in the order of $500,000. I hear a collective sharp intake of breath.

And, he says triumphantly, there is nothing in the Budget!

"But you wanted a cadillac..."

He says video streaming is a big deal. It's like putting on a show! The old lights in the Council Chamber would have to be ripped out and new brighter ones installed so viewers at home could enjoy watching their councillors in high definition. (I made the last bit up.)

Quality is an issue

Dino Basso, the Commissioner for Corporate Services, says these are only preliminary estimates but he reminds members they wanted a good viewing experience and that requires proper state-of-the-art lighting.

"There are cheaper versions but the quality may not be as good."

Basso, now increasingly assertive, tells them:

"Let's do it once and let's do it properly."

Newmarket's John Taylor who has been pressing for live streaming for a while seems to be caught off guard.

"The cost here seem immense compared with other municipalities."

He wants to know how the $500,000 splits between operating and capital expenditure.

All eyes turn to Bill Hughes, the regional treasurer, who knows where every cent goes. But in this case, unusually, he is foxed. There is more work to be done. He needs more information.

The ever-accommodating Taylor says he is prepared to be patient. Markham's Nirmala Armstrong is also surprised at the cost but she too will wait. Richmond Hill's Vito Spatafora - never one to rush into things - says they should do nothing until the legislation is passed that mandates the direct election of the regional chair.**

This leisurely timetable suits Wayne Emmerson who is now smiling.

He reassures them video streaming will happen.

"If it's in 2018 that's fine."

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

*  Bill 68 will also force York Region to bring in a Code of Conduct for members. At present it chooses not to have one on the grounds that it would duplicate the Codes of Conduct in its constituent municipalities. As I tap this out I am thinking of Vaughan's Michael Di Biase.

** The Province is now legislating to force the Region to have a directly elected Chair from 2018 (the position has always been indirectly elected by Council members) and the present incumbent, Wayne Emmerson, has already declared his candidacy.

The Building Ontario Up for Everyone Act (Budget Measures) 2016 says:

The (Municipal) Act is amended by adding the following section:

Head of regional council

   218.1  (1)  On the day the new council of a regional municipality is organized following the regular election in 2018, the head of council of a regional municipality shall be elected by general vote in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

Another report on video streaming is expected to go before York Regional Council by March next year.

  • You are here:  
  • Home