Is this fair?

"Engaging in a “fair, open and accessible public process” that includes community consultation should not be confused with an ultimate decision – by the community, by the planning staff or by the Council – to support or oppose any given application. The spirit of a “fair, open and accessible public process” that includes pre-application consultation was not met by the City in this case."  

DECISION DELIVERED BY SUSAN de AVELLAR SCHILLER AND ORDER OF THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD Sept. 14, 2009

http://www.areca.info/Documents/TOT/decision-sep-14-2009.pdf

That was late 2009. In early 2011, nothing seems to have changed. 

At the February 7th Council Meeting, Councillor Stintz, in support of the Developer, agreed to table a Motion at Council that no further notifications or communications were necessary and proceeded to finalise the Orchardview/Duplex development application. In a Motion for which there was no prior communication to the community, and which was not on the Agenda until the day of Council, Karen Stintz rescinded promises previously made to the local community by the North York Community Council. 

Among other things, her Motion removed the need for a Site Plan Agreement. This part of the planning process would have allowed the community to participate in crafting the overall "look" of the development, the streetscape and landscape. In its stead Councillor Stintz went in secret to her closest political allies and one other local resident to conduct a meeting which was then referred to in the Motion and characterised as a "Working Group Meeting". 


We've seen this before, haven't we? 


Furthermore, Karen Stintz now has her own "MINTO". With her underhanded action not only did she show disrespect for the community she is supposed to represent, she increased the DENSITY of the building to the same as the DENSITY of the MINTO building.

its2big has learned that ARECA and the Stanley Knowles Cooperative are pressing ahead with their appeal to the City Ombudsman. There's a "heads-up" going to the City Auditor too. And, now that Councillor Stintz has completely turned her back on the Orchardview/Duplex community, ARECA will be taking this awful affair to the OMB. 

We will be keeping you up to date via this blog.

Did you vote for this?

Karen Stintz stumped with David Miller and the New Development Party in April in support of Transit City. Now she heads up the TTC and will soon be cutting bus routes and increasing fares for students.

The people of Ward 16 did not vote for Mayor Ford and our councillor should not be cutting services to hard working constituents who use the bus service along Avenue Road.

The Toronto "Planning Department".

It appears we have two "Planning Departments" in Toronto. There's the group headed up by Gary Wright and then there's the local councillor.

During the Miller Administration the local councillor needed the approval of the New Development Party and that's about the extent of planning in this City.

The "Planning Department" is seriously underfunded for these very reasons. Why pay for more professionals when Council need on order-takers. "I'd like a 20 storey building here but the Official Plan says I can't have it" says a councillor to the planner, "OK, here's how we will get around that" says Mister Wright.

Where's all the money from development?

You all agree, Toronto grew up pretty fast in the last 30 years. It was during the time that Alberta was becoming an 'oil Province'. Albertans did very well but Toronto doesn't seem to have benefited from all the intensification it has experienced.

With development comes Development Charges. These are the fees property owners must pay the City to finance the additional infrastructure required to service new condo and office space. No matter what we think these charges should be it is obvious whatever the City received doesn't seem to be paying off.

The puny amounts developers pay makes us think this has been a major part of Toronto's budget problems all along. When you see the levels of profit companies like Minto and Riocan generate every time they build into the sky it is obvious the City and existing residents aren't getting what is needed to accomodate them.

The Ward Councillor has all the power.

We learned a lot on the campaign trail. What stood out was how few residents understood where the power lies in our municipal affairs. Many believe the big issue of the day is who will be Mayor. Will Smitherman be the man who will do what Miller promised or will Ford be the guy who finally gets the job done.

Who is Mayor is important but consider this. Regardless of who makes it to that position, and regardless of what happens to the functionality of Council, there will be many issues confronting Ward 16 constituents that will be decided by the councillor.

That's what happened on Orchard View and Duplex. It took from only May the 20th to July 18th for Karen Stintz to make up her mind and support a 20 storey building that will overwhelm the adjacent neighbourhoods. That wan't very long given all the deliberations communities deserve. The community met only once with the planner and that was only 5 days before he made his final decisions. All along, the local residents believed the councillor was opposed to a 17 storey plan and were taken completely by surprise when she supported a 20 storey plan!

Of course things had all been decided on long before that. That's how they get done under Karen Stintz. The same strategy was used on projects like the open space at Yonge and Eglinton and 1066 Avenue Road.

If you are comfortable in your lifestyle, the local councillor has all the power to change the view from where you live in a very short time. If the local councillor doesn't understand the Official Plan or the many policies designed to protect our neighbourhoods, matters can get a whole lot worse.

Look at what happened at 1249 Avenue Road.

Planning is important.

The large building behind this accident is 1066 Avenue Road. 

Imagine what it will be like with snow and ice on it!

The local community isn't happy.

But, that didn't seem to matter to Councillor Stintz.

She wanted to show she could be Mayor.

Development dominates Ward 16 debate

Orchard View and Duplex apartment building raises the ire of some candidates

Tags: VoteTO 2010, Ward 16

By Shawn Star

October 20, 2010

Neighbourhoods: Hoggs Hollow, Allenby Ledbury Park / Cricket Club / Bedford Park / Caribou Park / Lytton Park / North Toronto

SHAWN STAR/TOWN CRIER TAME DEBATE: While some had been expecting an evening full of personal attacks and fireworks between the Ward 16 council candidates the event was rather civil. Hopefuls, from left, Michael Coll, Roy MacDonald, Terry Mills and Karen Stintz answered questions from the audience on issues related to development, arts funding and infrastructure improvement. Personal attacks and mudslinging were kept to a minimum at the most recent Ward 16 debate.      Avenue Road Eglinton Community Association (ARECA) at the North Toronto Memorial Community Centre hosted the congenial debate on Monday night.       The more than 100 people in attendance posed questions to the candidates on topics ranging from arts funding to improving sidewalks and even to the candidates’ favourite restaurant in the ward. The most consistent issue was development, which was incorporated into one-third of the questions.      At the forefront of the development talk was the approval of a 20-storey apartment building at the corner of Orchard View Boulevard and Duplex Avenue and the role of The Working Group, an organization of community members and associations that opposed the development.      The most raucous moment came when incumbent councillor Karen Stintzdefended her role in the approval of the new building by saying the majority of people in The Working Group supported it.       “The Working Group was created about two years ago and we had some new members who were added in the last few months,” she said, before suggesting those late-coming opponents were seated with her at the candidates’ table.      Candidate Michael Coll said he was there from the first meeting and there was no such majority. He then pointed to fellow candidate and member of The Working Group, Terry Mills and his work as an example of Stintz not taking the community’s opinion into consideration.      “Terry (Mills) put forward a thoughtful proposal,” he said. “And I’m sure he can testify that his recommendations were not followed through.”       Mills addressed the issue by citing his track record on the issue of development, and how the community can stop the approval process of a development site it’s not in favour of.       “In 2003 I stopped Greenwin from doing an enclosure of that corner,” he said. “RioCan then came back with an application and Karen (Stintz) endorsed it saying it was great. I stopped it. So you can do it.”      Rounding out the four candidates was elementary school teacher Roy MacDonald, who said when it comes to development, he thinks Stintz has her priorities backward.      “With what Karen was saying, the first thing I heard was ‘developers’, then I heard ‘city planners’, then farther down the line I heard ‘residents’,” he said. “I think that needs to change a little bit.”

h
























































http://mytowncrier.ca/development-dominates-ward-16-debate.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter