Details

Tracee Chambers is the latest hopeful to throw her hat into the ring for the Ward 5 by-election. She tells me:

“I have owned a home and business in the downtown core for over 25 years and I feel the uniqueness and authenticity of Main Street is very important. As an entrepreneur I realize the importance of growth and change however feel confident that these two worlds can complement each other… I feel that a 7 storey building would be too high for our Historical Main Street.”

This means that six out of the seven declared candidates for Ward 5 say they are against Bob Forrest’s Clock Tower development in the form that is currently before Council.

To build his out-of-place and disfiguring apartment block, Bob Forrest needs a zoning by-law amendment to the existing Historic Downtown Urban Centre (UC-D1) zone which restricts development to three storeys.

Just say no

The Council is under no obligation to give him the permission he needs.

It is plain to all with eyes to see that the development would wreck the old town’s unique character, ambiance and panoramas and set a precedent for others to follow in future.

The Town’s own website reminds us:

“The purpose of declaring an area a heritage conservation district is to conserve and enhance the character of the neighbourhood. A heritage conservation district plan guides physical change over time so that any change contributes to the district's historic character.”

Forrest filed his redevelopment application with the Town in August 2013 - before the slothful Van Bynen got round to enacting the Heritage Conservation District by-law on 21 October 2013. But that by-law simply replicates to the last dot and comma the policy adopted by the Council in 2011.

Injured innocence

Forrest, all injured innocence, cries foul. He appeals to the OMB claiming the by-law should not apply to the land he owns. The OMB rules that the future of the Forrest lands will be determined by the Town when it comes to consider Forrest’s rezoning application. Forrest’s appeal can then be resurrected after the Town has made its decision. And that is where things stand. (See note from Town Solicitor below)

Zoning by-laws infinitely flexible

Zoning by-laws are, of course, notoriously flexible and amendments are ten-a-penny. A whole industry has grown up designed to circumvent their intent. People buying property, who place weight and reliance on the Town’s zoning by-laws believing the words mean what they say, are often shocked later on at the ease with which these very same by-laws can be subverted by rapacious developers aided by a compliant council. The whole system is utterly fraudulent and dishonest.

Janus-faced Mayor

This built-in flexibility allows our smiling janus-faced Mayor to do two mutually contradictory things. He signs the Lower Main Street South Heritage Conservation District By-law on 21 October 2013 capping any new development at three storeys and then, thirty months later, he tells the ERA newspaper on 11 April 2016 that a seven storey apartment building in the middle of the Heritage Conservation District is a great example of the kind of intensification the historic downtown needs.

Van Bynen knows how to game the system using his old friends "process and procedure" to get the result he wants.

We now know that for our Mayor, “intensification” trumps “conservation” any day.

If Van Bynen succeeds and Forrest gets his zoning by-law amendment, the Historic Downtown Urban Centre (UC-D1) zone and its three storey height cap will not be worth the paper it is written on.

In these circumstances, it is an absolute racing certainty that concerned residents will go to the OMB to defend the Heritage Conservation District against the decision of Van Bynen and his colleagues to ignore their own policy.

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

Last September 2015, the Town Solicitor reminded councillors of the status of Bob Forrest’s appeal to the OMB:

“In August 2013 a rezoning application was filed to redevelop the lands at 180-­194 Main Street. A public meeting was held on February 3, 2014. On October 21, 2013 Council enacted the Lower Main Street South Heritage Conservation District By-law 2013-51. The lands are located within the Heritage Conservation District. In August 2014 the OMB ordered that By-law 2013-51 save an except for the lands located at 180-194 Main Street shall be deemed to have come into effect on October 21, 2013. A date has not been set for hearing of the appeal until after Council makes a decision regarding the rezoning application for the lands.”

Details

Bob Forrest has found his champion.

Real estate salesperson, Wasim Jarrah, is an enthusiastic advocate for the controversial seven storey development in the heart of Newmarket’s heritage conservation district. Throwing caution to the wind, he has just decided to run for the Ward 5 vacancy.

Jarrah told the Era newspaper on 19 April 2016:

“Main needs to be revitalized; that’s the main thing. From a real estate, business and economics standpoint, people need to come to Main and live on it to attract and retain businesses in the area. This will bring in that much needed customer base. Rentals are much needed. Newmarket does not have much vacant land to build on and the only way to redevelop is vertical.”

Jarrah was down to speak in favour of Forrest’s proposal at the Statutory Public meeting on 9 May 2016 but, without any explanation or apology, didn't show up.

The Change.org petition against the Forrest plan, promoted by Margaret Davis, won the backing of 1,213 people – the vast majority Newmarket residents. The petition called on the Council to respect its own planning policies and stick to the mandated three storey height cap that applies in the heritage conservation district. It was a powerful statement of opposition.

By contrast, Jill Kellie’s petition backing the development languished far behind with 222 supporters.

Jarrah chose not to post a comment.

He will now have plenty of opportunities to explain his position to an overwhelmingly sceptical public.

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

Update at 18.15: Tracee Chambers becomes the seventh candidate to join the race.

Update on 5 August 2016: Bob Kwapis' website is now up and running.

Details

Newmarket Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, appears isolated in his enthusiasm for Bob Forrest's Clock Tower development which would blight the the historic downtown.

All five candidates battling to fill Joe Sponga’s vacant council seat in Ward 5 have repudiated Van Bynen’s eccentric view that

“the Clock Tower is a great example of the intensification we need”.

Darryl Wolk, the first to declare, has repeatedly made clear he is unequivocally opposed to Forrest’s plan. Earlier today he tweets:

“A vote for WOLK is a vote against 7 storeys of rental in our heritage district. Our historic downtown will NOT be destroyed on my watch!”

Darryl Wolk is a known quantity who relishes speaking his mind. But it is unclear whether he can translate his impressive presence on social media into votes in the ballot box. There is no straight read-across. Remember Maddie Di Muccio? She tweeted and blogged from dawn to dusk and was crushed in the 2014 election by the then unknown Kelly Broome-Plumley.

The hitherto low profile Bob Kwapis, perhaps best known for his work as co-chair of the Ward 5 traffic safety committee, declared his candidacy on the same day as Wolk (26 July 2016). He tells me he has "great concerns" about the development in its current form. He says:

“I cannot support a mammoth building that does not respect our heritage.”

Tom Pearson, the veteran anti-poverty campaigner, says he believes any new development should be sustainable

“within the three floors designation of the original official plan.”

Ron Eibel, who stood unsuccessfully in Ward 5 in 2014, is deeply concerned about the huge bulk and mass of the controversial proposal. Eibel won plaudits for his scale model of Forrest’s development which took pride of place in the Council Chamber for the second Statutory Public meeting on the application. 

Ian Johnston, who ran against Maddie Di Muccio at the last election, is keeping his powder dry, telling me he is waiting for the Planning Report on 29 August 2016. But his views on the Clock Tower are on the record when he told the Council earlier this year:

“I think the project is “too large” for the area in consideration…”

We have five candidates and counting. Others are still thinking about throwing their hat into the ring.

But, for the moment, retired banker Tony Van Bynen looks increasingly isolated, a cheerleader for a doomed project with very few friends.

Nominations close on 2 September. The By-election will be held on 17 October 2016.

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

Update on 3 August 2016: See Chris Simon's coverage of the by-election candidates here. And you can read Bob Kwapis' detailed views on the Clock Tower here.

 

Details

Today’s Special Council meeting confirmed 17 October 2016 as the date for the Ward 5 by-election, called to replace Joe Sponga. The by-election will be held under the familiar first-past-the-post system, not the ranked ballot which was floated as a possibility.

A number of hopefuls are present today, smiling and shaking hands in the way that candidates do.

Darryl Wolk, the first greyhound out of the trap, has already declared himself a candidate and will no doubt be handing in his nomination papers tomorrow in the first light of dawn.

It is deliciously cool in the Council Chamber but outside it is as humid as the Amazon. In wanders a very hot Wolk, attired in suit and tie and with glinting beads of perspiration on his forehead. He is backed by Chris Campbell the self styled “runner-up” in the two candidate race for Mayor in 2014.

A grinning Wolk spots me and thrusts out his arm to shake my hand. I oblige.

Wolk, who challenged John Taylor for Regional Councillor in 2014, desperately wants to get on the council so he can (a) shake the place up and (b) torture Tony Van Bynen, exquisitely slowly and at length, about his Mayoral salary.

But, to be fair, Wolk also has very firm views about Ward 5 and the difference he believes he can make. He is against Forrest’s Clock Tower proposal so, on this one at least, he is on the side of the angels.

I see another hopeful.

John Heckbert, wearing his trademark suspenders, was runner-up in Ward 5 at the last election. He too shakes my hand and gives me a nod of recognition.

If today’s Special Council meeting had defied convention and opted to appoint a councillor then the eager Heckbert would have been hovering in the wings, waiting for the call.

Heckbert is also opposed to Forrest’s Clock Tower.

Where are the candidates who will be supporting Bob Forrest's monstrous seven storey apartment building in the heart of the downtown heritage conservation district? Are we going to see any emerge from the undergrowth? Will anyone have the nerve to echo Van Bynen who told us the Clock Tower is a great example of the intensification we need?

Along the row from me sits the dark horse candidate, Bob Kwapis. I sidle along and sit next to him and introduce myself.

I know he has reservations about the Clock Tower but he is waiting until his nomination papers go in before giving chapter and verse. We are all waiting with great anticipation for his detailed views.

Clock Tower decision now delayed until after 17 October 2016

It is now clear that Forrest’s planning application will not be considered until after the by-election. (It was penciled in for 29 August 2016).

Today John Taylor tells his colleagues:

“If you look at Ward 5 there are some important issues it faces and, obviously, the Clock Tower is one of those. And I think that to ensure that the representative of the people of that Ward when that decision is made is someone who is elected and chosen by the people I think is important… It will give the Ward the opportunity to engage in the conversation about several important topics in the downtown and Quaker Hill etc and I think it will be a healthy and robust conversation I’m sure.”

It is perfectly obvious we need a Ward 5 candidates’ debate where all the hopefuls can be pitched against each other. The Clock Tower is a huge issue – and not just for the ward but for the Town as a whole.

Trinity United Church, a stone's throw from Forrest's proposed development, has expressed grave concerns about the possible impact on the fabric of the Church building, its foundations and its priceless stained glass windows.

This by-election gives us a heaven sent opportunity to hear from local people.

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

Details

The short answer is no.

The Ward 5 by-election to replace Joe Sponga will be held under the familiar first-past-the-post system.

The agenda for Monday’s Special Council meeting (25 July 2016) holds out the possibility that the by-election may be conducted under the new ranked ballot system which allows voters to express their preferences – ranking candidates 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on.

If our councillors choose to go down the ranked ballot route, Newmarket will be a trailblazer for the new voting system.

(I had assumed the new ranked ballot system would be introduced in 2018.)

In his report to Monday’s Council meeting, the Town Clerk tells us:

“Council may enact a by-law authorizing the use of ranked ballots for the Ward 5 by-election. A report will be brought forward to the August 29, 2016 Committee of the Whole which will address the vote method and the ranked ballot option should a by-election be called.”

The report goes on to tell us that all councils in Ontario:

“now have the option to enact a by-law to use ranked ballot elections (but) the details setting out how the ranked ballot system will work in practice are to be contained in the regulations which are still being drafted”.

This is the fly in the ointment.

The consultation period on the proposed regulations closes on 28 July 2016 and it is anyone’s guess when they will eventually be promulgated by the Lieutenant Governor. The submissions have to be weighed and analysed by the Office of Legislative Counsel and the draft regulations have to be amended or not. We could be watching paint dry.

The Town Clerk’s proposed timetable for the Ward 5 by-election tells us the regular Council meeting on 12 September 2016 will consider the ranked ballot by-law.

But, if the regulations in any way reflect the draft, they will stipulate that councils must hold an open house before the by-law is enacted to provide the public with information on any alternative voting method being considered for use in the election. And, crucially, the Council has to give at least 30 days notice of the open house in a newspaper circulating in the municipality.

In addition, the municipality must then hold a public meeting (at least 15 days after the open house) to allow the public to speak to council about the proposed by-law.

Just looking at the timetable, it seems to me a ranked ballot for the Ward 5 by election is a complete non-starter.

Apart from anything else, the by-law wouldn’t just apply to Ward 5 but to all subsequent regular elections and by-elections and it would be used to elect all members of the council. It is not something to be rushed or corners cut.

Clearly, we are stuck with first-past-the-post. At least for the time being.

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

 

  • You are here:  
  • Home