- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Back story: The GO Bus Terminal at Davis Drive West figured prominently in the Glenway OMB Hearing. The Terminal is next door to Glenway and much of the neighbourhood is within 500 metres of it. This close proximity is, in planning terms, highly significant. Ira Kagan, the developer’s lawyer, told the OMB adjudicator, Susan Schiller, in his closing submission on 27 March 2014, there was not a “shred of evidence that the Town, Region or GO Transit wanted to move this Bus Terminal”.
In fact, the revised and final version of Newmarket’s Urban Centres Secondary Plan, adopted by the Council on 23 June 2014, which goes up to York Region for approval in the new year, allows for this as one of a number of options to be studied as part of a separate, wide-ranging transit and transportation review. On completion, this review will, by amendment, be folded into the Secondary Plan and become part of it.
The earlier version of the Secondary Plan – put before the OMB Hearing and dissected by Kagan– was silent on this crucial issue.
The Glenway Preservation Association’s professional planner, Nick McDonald, told the OMB that Marianneville’s application to develop Glenway was premature. Major transit and transportation issues still had to be addressed. He called for a Town led study which would include the GO Bus Terminal and the Upper Canada Mall site. He was ridiculed by Kagan for suggesting such a thing.
“Mr McDonald may think it (the bus station) should move but no-one else seems to agree with him.”
If the Director of Planning, Rick Nethery, and the Town’s senior planners had revealed their intentions earlier, (that the Upper Canada Mall study would look in detail at transit integration) it would have fundamentally changed the dynamics of the OMB Glenway hearing.
The OMB Hearing, reportedly costing the Town over $700,000, was boycotted throughout by Newmarket Planning staff.
The Chronology in outline
September 2013. Newmarket planning staff receive the GDH Transportation Study which the Town had commissioned to inform the Secondary Plan. Section 4 of the Executive Summary talks about the possibility of relocating the Bus Terminal but that “the current vision for the existing GO Transit/YRT Bus Terminal south of Upper Canada Mall is to remain in its current location”. It goes on:
“If the bus station is relocated to the UCM site, the volume of associated buses should not significantly impact future operations compared to leaving the station in its current location. Furthermore, the relocation of the bus station to the UCM property may even serve to reduce future net effects given potential reductions to pedestrian crossings of Davis Drive. The impact of such a change in operations has not been specifically modeled in our study, so any bus station relocation should include a detailed evaluation of transportation impacts and requirements.”
The GDH Transportation Study was eventually put into the public domain six months later, on April 2, 2014 - after my third request for it to be published and after the OMB adjudicator had made her decision in favour of the developer.
November 25, 2013 Councillors vote unanimously to back Glenway at the OMB.
March 2014. With the OMB Glenway Hearing under way, Newmarket’s Draft Secondary Plan is circulated for comment. (See Urban Centres Secondary Planning Process at www.newmarket.ca) It mentions two “Mobility Hubs” – one at the Tannery (a so-called Gateway Hub) and another at Yonge and Davis (a so-called Anchor Hub). The Gateway Hub is identified on the Secondary Plan’s maps with a giant circle. The Anchor Hub is represented by a tiny red dot. There is reference to a study of the Upper Canada Mall site and in paragraph 5.3.4 (ii) (e) it talks blandly of the “integration of transit into the site and between the site and the Yonge Davis Rapidway Station.”
March 27, 2014. In his closing submission to the OMB Hearing, the developer’s lawyer, Ira Kagan, ridicules Nick McDonald, the professional planner hired by the Glenway Preservation Association to put their case to the Board.
McDonald says Glenway shouldn’t be looked at in isolation. He argues for a wider study going beyond the Glenway lands, taking in the GO bus terminal and the Upper Canada Mall site. McDonald tells the Hearing that the Town had not identified major transit areas in its draft Secondary Plan and that more work was needed. In view of this he says “it would be premature to consider the Marianneville application in advance of a Town led process”.
Kagan tells the adjudicator:
“There is not a shred of evidence that the Town, Region or GO Transit want to move this bus terminal. The terminal is identified in a variety of planning documents that the various witnesses reviewed and never once was it identified for relocation. Mr McDonald may think it should move but no-one else seems to agree with him. Even the ongoing OPA 10 Study (ie the Draft Secondary Plan for Newmarket’s Urban Centre) is not proposing that the GO bus terminal be relocated. Accordingly, the addition of these two parcels of land to a Town led study is not supported on the evidence.”
The OMB Adjudicator rules in favour of the developer, Marianneville.
April 22, 2014 Councillors Maddie Di Muccio and Chris Emanuel call for a meeting to consider the lessons to be learned. The motion is carried without opposition:
“That Council direct staff to organize a public meeting after the Ontario Municipal Board releases its written decision and within this term of Council, on what has been learned about the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By Law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision for Marianneville Developments Limited (Glenway) process and the effects of future development as York Region prepares for growth.”
April 28, 2014. In its response to the March draft of the Secondary Plan, Metrolinx specifically asks the Town to show in the Schedules the area to be covered by the Yonge/Davis Mobility Hub study. It seems to me unlikely a study of the proposed Mobility Hub area at Yonge and Davis would exclude from it the GO Bus Terminal, a stone’s throw away.
In its comments on the March draft Secondary Plan Metrolinx says:
“The four plans in Schedules 3 (land use), 4 (height and density), 5 (street network) and 6 (parks, open space and natural heritage) identify the two Mobility Hubs within the Newmarket Urban Centres and the conceptual Mobility Hub Station Area Plan Study Area for the Newmarket GO train station. It is recommended the conceptual Mobility Hub Area Plan Study Area for the Anchor Hub at the intersection of Yonge Street and Davis Drive be detailed on the Schedules.”
This recommendation is rejected.
On the very same day (28 April 2014) Marion Plaunt, the senior planner with responsibility for the Secondary Plan file, tells councillors at a meeting on the revised draft Secondary Plan:
“One of the considerations in (the Mobility Hub study) is how do we, as we plan forward, integrate the bus station and the GO train station, whether they should naturally be joined at some point, at one location. That is part of the analysis identified within the Mobility Hub criteria.”
June 9, 2014. At the Council Workshop to update councillors on the revised draft Secondary Plan, Marion Plaunt tells councillors that while Metrolinx believes the mobility hub principle should apply to Yonge and Davis:
“there is not going to be a circle on the map”.
Regional Councillor John Taylor quizzes Ms Plaunt on the Mobility Hub issue but doesn’t follow up with: Why not?
The answer is straightforward. A line on a map showing the Mobility Hub study area would inevitably have to include the GO Bus terminal.
June 23, 2014. Newmarket councillors agree the revised draft Secondary Plan which now goes up to the Region for final approval.
Instead of a Mobility Hub study area delineated on the Schedule maps, as requested by Metrolinx, we have a Regional Shopping Centre Study Area focused on the Upper Canada Mall site. Paragraph 5.3.4 (ii) says:
A Master Plan for the Regional Shopping Centre Study Area as identified on Schedules 3 (land use), 4 (height and density), and 5 (street network) will be prepared by the landowner(s) in co-operation with the Town, York Region, Metrolinx and other relevant partners to address, as a minimum, the following:
(e) mobility hub study considerations including, but not limited to, integration of transit into the site and/or between this site and the Yonge Davis Rapidway, the GO Bus Terminal and GO train station in accordance with the Metrolinx Mobility Hub Guidelines.
The words in bold show the changes from the earlier March draft.
“clear, direct, and short transfers between transit modes and routes, including accessible conventional and specialized transit, by minimizing walking distances and removing physical and perceived barriers within transit stations.”
A Mobility Hub at Yonge and Davis on the UCM site north of Davis Drive West with the GO Bus Terminal on its existing site on the South side of Davis Drive West is unlikely to be considered “seamless”.
What does all this mean in practice? The study requested by Nick McDonald, and dismissed by Ira Kagan as fanciful, will go ahead - but without the Glenway component. The irreversible transformation and blighting of a quiet and peaceful Newmarket neighbourhood is about to begin.
Meanwhile, in another part of town…
While there is no big circle at Yonge and Davis on the Schedules, there is one at Mulock Drive which, according to the final version of the Secondary Plan, is the site of the proposed new GO rail station.
Hmmm.
Metrolinx, told me only last week: “While the Town of Newmarket supports a new station at Mulock Drive, GO Transit has no plans to build a station in this location.”
You really couldn't make it up.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
It is now 156 days since the end of the Glenway Hearing and a jaw-dropping 183 days since the OMB adjudicator, Susan Schiller, gave her quick-fire oral decision in favour of the rapacious developers, Marianneville, who, as I write, are preparing to transform the neighbourhood out of all recognition.
Ms Schiller’s delay in releasing her written decision is as shameful as it is inexplicable.
Her leisurely approach has serious knock-on consequences. With the election almost upon us there is now no chance of getting the “lessons learned” meeting that the Town promised on 22 April 2014.
Inevitably, councillors and the hopefuls seeking election on 27 October are stepping into this vacuum, telling us what went wrong at Glenway. But this doesn’t give us the whole picture.
Much of the information we need to fully understand what happened is kept under lock and key at the Town Hall.
Freedom of Information
So today (26 September 2014) I went to the Town Hall, paid $5 and put in a Freedom of Information request to examine a raft of confidential memorandums that were presented to councillors at the special meeting of the council on 7 April 2014 called to discuss Glenway
I also want to examine the minutes of the Committee of the Whole (Closed Session) that met the same day and which gave directions to staff.
What instructions did our councillors give to the Town’s legal counsel and lead negotiator, Mary Bull, on the terms on which she could settle with Marianneville? Was she given a completely free hand? What conditions, if any, were attached? The OMB adjudicator gave her oral decision in March 2014 so why continue with this suffocating secrecy?
The Town’s Solicitor, Esther Armchuk, told me in May 2014 that:
Closed session discussions or directions given by Council in Closed Sessions remain confidential unless Council decides to make some or all of those discussions or directions public.
As I said back then, the way forward is to “declassify” these documents to allow proper informed debate.
Taylor blames the OMB, not the Town’s approach
Regional Councillor John Taylor pins the blame for the Glenway decision on the “highly flawed” OMB, not the Town’s approach. Not strictly true. Yes, the OMB has problems but, as important, the Town’s team was seriously underbriefed.
The Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, tells the Newmarket Era newspaper: “It (the decision to go to the OMB) wasn’t just defending the residents; it was defending the plan for the Town. The infrastructure we’re building is not going to be able to accommodate the additional homes in Glenway.”
If the Town’s hired legal gun, Mary Bull was supposed to be “defending the plan for the Town” her performance fell far short of what was required. In fact, it was lamentably inadequate. At one point in the OMB Hearing, the adjudicator asked the Town’s team when work started on the Secondary Plan. There was a long embarrassing silence. As it happens, I was the only person present who knew the answer but, as a member of the public sitting below the salt at the back of the room, I couldn’t speak.
I am left wondering if Van Bynen called for daily reports on what was happening at the OMB Hearing. If so, he would have realized that things were going off the rails in a pretty dramatic way. Did he ask why no-one from the Town’s Planning Department was present? And if not, why not?
Why didn’t the Mayor instruct the Director of Planning to show up once and a while if only to provide answers to the OMB Hearing that the Town’s counsel, Mary Bull, was incapable of doing?
Maddie Di Muccio challenges latest confidential memo on Glenway
In the latest twist, Maddie Di Muccio challenged the Town’s CEO, Bob Shelton, at this week’s Committee of the Whole (22 September) to explain why a confidential memorandum circulated to councillors relating to the Glenway West Lands couldn’t be made public. Without a single ally on Council, her animated protest fizzles out in the way they always do.
We are still none the wiser.
Newmarket’s municipal election: 32 days to go.
----------------------------------------------------------------
My Freedom of Information request is for:
(1) the confidential memorandum dated 3 April 2014 from Ruth Victor, Ruth Victor Associates, regarding Application for Official Plan Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval, Marianneville Developments Limited (Glenway)
(2) the confidential memorandum dated 3 April 2014 from Mary Bull and Johanna Shapira, Wood Bull LLP regarding Marianneville Developments - Phase 2
(3) the confidential memorandum dated 4 April 2014 from the Assistant Director of Planning regarding Marianneville Developments Limited
(4) the minutes of the Committee of the Whole (Closed Session) on 7 April 2014.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Metrolinx has confirmed the track will have to be doubled on the Barrie corridor to accommodate all-day two-way GO express trains, pledged by Premier Kathleen Wynne in her speech in April to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.
She said:
“Over ten years, we aim to phase in electric train service every fifteen minutes on all GO lines that we own. Doing that would mean moving the most people for the least cost. And it would help to unclog highways across the GTHA. We just know that that is a reality. And it would do for the region what subways did for Toronto back to the 1950s.”
In a presentation to last week’s Metrolinx Board meeting, the President of GO Transit, Greg Percy, said:
“We know one new track will be required pretty much along the full length of the corridor because much of it is single track today. We need to double track that corridor and it also includes quite a few road and rail grade separations along the way.”
You can see the video here. Percy talks about the Barrie corridor 40 minutes 30 seconds into the presentation.
Every weekday, GO trains make 14 trips along the Barrie corridor, carrying 17,000 people.
Confusion
Percy’s statement clears up earlier confusion about whether a second track would be required anywhere in Newmarket.
Paula Edwards, the Director of Customer Care at Metrolinx, replying on behalf of CEO Bruce McCuaig, told me on 24 June 2014 that:
“Our planned improvement of the Barrie corridor is not solely based on twin tracking. Although twin tracking may be required in some areas, it is doubtful if it will be needed for the entire route.”
GO rail station at Mulock Drive
In the same letter Edwards told me there are no plans for a new GO rail station at Mulock Drive even though one is pencilled in to Newmarket’s Secondary Plan (which goes up to York Region for approval early next year).
Clearly, there is still a huge amount of work to be done to hit Kathleen Wynne's 10 year target for all-day two-way GO trains.
It is impossible to listen to Greg Percy and not come away with the conclusion that Metrolinx is only now moving forward – and from a standing start. True, work on electrification options was done back in 2010 but it seems little has been done on how to accommodate the 340km of new second tracks that will be required across the system.
Percy told Board members that land acquisition would be required. This is not something that happens overnight.
Davis Drive
In Newmarket, road and rail separation will be required at Davis Drive and probably elsewhere given that trains will be whizzing past at speed every 15 minutes. Percy says the average cost of road rail separation is around $25m but it could fall anywhere within the range $15m - $80m depending on the complexities of the engineering.
The Metrolinx Board will be getting an update on the work programme at its next meeting on 11 December 2014. I would like to know what work has already been done on the Barrie corridor and what is outstanding. And those matters where it is too early to say.
Percy laid great stress in his presentation on keeping everyone informed. One of the four key elements in his Work Plan is “Engagement – identifying the work necessary to engage stakeholders that include the public, municipalities and elected officials.”
That’s what I like to hear.
My enthusiasm is, however, tempered by the fact that I am still waiting for answers to questions I put to Bruce McCuaig over four months ago.
I hope Chris Ballard – who made his first speech at Queen’s Park on the GO train service – is listening.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
The King George School on Park Avenue – a stone’s throw from Newmarket Public Library – has been empty for years. The front steps are now beginning to crumble.
People in the immediate neighbourhood and elsewhere in Ward 5 are understandably curious about the owner’s plans for this fine building that is designated under the Ontario Heritage Act.
The owner, Chrisula Selfe, bought the property on 15 November 2011from the York Region District School Board for $1,275,000.
The tax classification of the old school is “commercial” and has an assessed value of $762,500. By my back-of-the-envelope calculations the annual property tax payable is $15,489 give or take a dollar or two. To most people this would be quite a bundle of cash to fork out every year just to keep the building empty.
Of course, the owners may qualify for a “vacancy rebate”.
I am told by my spies in the Town’s Finance Department: “If the property is vacant and the owner meets the criteria then the owner would be eligible to apply for a vacancy rebate for 30% of the taxes.” To qualify, the entire building must have been empty for 90 consecutive days. If the building is partially used then other criteria apply.
However, all this is a tad academic as we don’t know who has applied for - and been granted - a vacancy rebate. This information is confidential. But why? If people choose to keep a property empty and claim a vacancy rebate the rest of us pay more.
Earlier this year the local developer and self styled entrepreneur, Bob Forrest, disclosed he had been in touch with Chrisula Selfe’s husband, Neil Selfe, in the hope he (Forrest) might relocate some of his business tenants on Main Street South to the old school with the idea of making it some kind of “community hub”. (This was before he decided to cut his losses and put the Clock Tower and the adjacent properties up for sale.)
According to Forrest, the owners are in no rush to do anything with the school. But, intriguingly, Forrest says Neil Selfe - whom he dubs a “Bay Street financial type” - has some very set ideas about what he wants to do there.
Perhaps it is time for the owners to stir themselves and tell the voters of Ward 5 what they have in mind. They have had years to think about it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Chris Campbell’s campaign launch is a jolly affair.
No sign of any Newmarket councillors. I am on the look out.
But, inevitably, Darryl Wolk, is here, pressing the flesh with one hand, cell phone in the other.
Campbell paces up and down the stage at the Canadian Legion at Srigley Street, speaking confidently and fluently for over twenty minutes without a note in his hand. You can see it here.
As he fires his first barbs at Tony Van Bynen, my first reaction is one of relief. Thank goodness there is a credible challenger, someone who can have an intelligent debate with the incumbent about his stewardship and where the Town is going.
In the last Mayoral election in 2010, a truly feeble candidate, Michael Cascione, nevertheless took 19% of the vote against Van Bynen’s 81%. Campbell is poised to do much better this time. But it will take considerable skill and effort to prise the old barnacle from the rock to which he has been attached for so long.
Campbell’s speech has some good lines. He tells us being an elected representative is not an entitlement. And that it is time to take back our Town! These sentiments resonate widely.
He is fizzing with indignation when he gets on to the Newmarket soccer controversy which he claims was an inside deal initiated by the Regional Councillor (John Taylor).
He pledges to put a vote to Council “to rescind that stinking deal!”
I gasp at the ferocity of the language. WooHoo!
What does he know that the rest of us don’t?
Personally, I don’t have a problem with councils helping out local organisations, be they sports clubs or theatres or something else – providing always the terms of the deal are out in the open. Councils should be able to act in the wider interests of their communities so long as they do so within their powers. Plainly, the soccer deal was legal otherwise it would never have got off the ground in the first place.
Campbell is on much stronger ground when he criticises Newmarket’s addiction to closed council meetings and the obsessive secrecy that marks this Council term. There is a whole raft of stuff on Glenway, for example, still to get into the public domain.
And it will.
Page 233 of 273