Details

Details of the proposed new GO Rail Station at Mulock Drive are being presented to the Metrolinx Board meeting today (Thursday 8 December 2016).

The "concept drawing" shows grade separation with the rail tracks going underneath Mulock Drive. There will be two pedestrian underpasses under the tracks.

The drawings also shows a bus loop and parking for 550 vehicles. There is also a passenger pick up and drop off (PPUDO) with 40 spaces.  

You can read the Metrolinx report on parking and station access here. It sets out a general approach.

There is nothing to show the possible co-location of bus and rail stations. This is an issue that simply must be addressed either at Mulock or at the Newmarket station at the Tannery. The Newmarket GO Bus Terminal on Eagle Street West and Davis Drive is 1.4 miles away.

The Metrolinx reports talks of the following considerations which it says are relevant:

Interplay of factors influencing station location: property acquisition, creek and environmental considerations, hydro, electrification infrastructure, track alignment, grade separation at Mulock Drive

Efforts will be required to achieve strong urban design and walkable neighbourhood with a road-over-rail grade separation

Assessment of sewer and water capacity in the area required  

YRT servicing of site (on-street or in-station) to be determined  

The Town of Newmarket has committed to implementing transit supportive planning regimes around a Mulock GO station, and is exploring planning options to establish such a regime around the station site, recognizing that a re-examination of current land uses and densities in the station area are warranted. 

More development in the Mulock area will push land prices higher. And, of course, the Town's population forecasts will have to be revised upwards. 

Over a year ago I urged Newmarket Council to purchase the land now earmarked for the new rail station when it came on the market for under $8m. But the opportunity was lost.

$8m is nothing for a Town the size of Newmarket. It would buy, say, six houses in Stonehaven.

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

See the Metrolinx new stations report here. The procurement package update here. And the new stations presentations here.

Details

To the Small Claims Court in Eagle Street to hear Matilde Di Muccio's ludicrous action for defamation against Regional Councillor John Taylor. Her husband, John Blommesteyn, wants Jack Zwicker to be the trial judge. Now read on...

It has been a long running saga which I felt compelled to follow from the outset. I now think of myself as a regular at the Court. I have been here so often I am on nodding terms with police officers and sundry Court staff. I am also beginning to recognise members of the judiciary - on and off duty.

Today, presiding in the tiny Small Claims Courtroom, is Deputy Judge Alessandro Di Cecco whose accented English has a musical Italian air to it.

We enter his Court in single file and take our places. He starts by telling us there will be no trial today. I can't believe what I am hearing. Not another delay! Surely not!  

The Judge tells us he cannot take the case because of a conflict declared last September. Apparently, he knows Taylor. So why on earth did the Court administrators schedule the trial for a date when he would be presiding at the Small Claims Court?

Running out of Judges

He says he will get a new trial date, making sure that Judges who have been involved previously in the case, through settlement conferences and such like, are excluded.

The list grows ever longer. Besides Deputy Judge Alessandro Di Cecco we can add Deputy Judge Davis. And Deputy Judge Mark Burch and Deputy Judge Vincent "growly bear" Stabile. And today we are to add Deputy Judge Paul Gollom. I fear we shall soon be running out of judges untainted by Di Muccio's action.

Now I hear Judge Di Cecco telling both parties they are the most powerful people in the room.  In his soft Italian accent, he tells them they can kiss and make up and be friends again (well, that's the gist of it).  He tells them there is a coffee shop downstairs and perhaps they can talk things over and reach an amicable settlement.

The Judge, now looking first at Di Muccio and then at Taylor says:

"I can invite you to go downstairs."

I can hardly believe my ears.

Matilde's husband, John Blommesteyn, with five impressively thick binders in front of him, protests that they've already had two settlement conferences and have "thrown out the olive branch" to Taylor but to no avail.

Taylor says he is not going downstairs to have coffee with his nemesis. He would prefer a glass of strychnine. (I made that up.)

Just politics

Di Muccio says she just wants an apology and the record to be corrected. She tells the Judge it is a very simple case. It was about words uttered by Taylor in 2015.

"Anything before then was just politics."

What refreshing candour!

Now the Judge is searching for a date that will suit them both.

He is checking the list of his brother judges who would be excluded.

There is much discussion about Deputy Judge Paul Gollom who struck out the libel elements of Di Muccio's action, at her request, on 26 October.

Now I am listening to a surreal exchange. Blommesteyn tells us Judge Gollum struck out  libel from his wife's claim even though the defendant (Taylor) contested this.

For Taylor, this is an absurd statement. Why on earth would he contest the dropping of the libel claim?

Di Muccio tells us

"I am absolutely aware he did contest it!"

I am the school swot. I want to raise my hand and say:

"Please Sir! I was there and he didn't do it, Sir!"

Bring me the transcript!

Di Muccio demands a transcript. The Judge - to my utter astonishment - says it takes six months to get a transcript. Are these transcripts meticulously written up by hand on the finest vellum?

The Judge wants to know why Di Muccio feels Judge Gollom has a conflict when all he did was strike out the libel. Good question, Sir!

Di Muccio explains that Taylor's whole defence is based on libel and slander. There are all the other things he did to her -  you know, the targeted malice, intentional infliction of mental suffering, the injurious falsehoods and so on. She infers he is not up to snuff on all that stuff.

Blommesteyn says they will accept Gollom as a possible trial Judge so long as Taylor agrees not to appeal if the Judge finds in their favour.

Maddie wears the trousers

No. No. No. says Di Muccio.

It is now clear who wears the trousers in the Blommesteyn household.

She tells the Judge that out of an abundance of caution and a desire for transparency and in the cause of greater democracy she wants Gollom on the banned list.

Taylor wearily says he just wants the case heard. It is not about judge shopping.

Now Blommesteyn is telling us he takes exception to the judge shopping comment!

This is coming along quite nicely and is warming up to be first class entertainment but now Di Cecco rules "enough".

He will exclude Judge Gollom.

Now Blommestyn is on a roll. He says:

"If you are looking for a Judge then I suggest Jack Zwicker."

DJ Di Cecco rebukes him:

"No! You cannot pick the Judge!"

As if.

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

Details

There are many casualties in the Clock Tower saga.

The flourishing Main Street businesses whose owners were evicted by Bob Forrest who cited "demolition" as a reason.

The public whose iconic Main Street was blighted for years by shops boarded up and shuttered by Forrest. 

The so-called heritage professionals whose "expertise" is hired out to the highest bidder with their views tailored to fit the brief.

The peer reviewers whose shoddy work is tolerated and not exposed by Staff.

The Staff whose actions and inactions conspired against the public interest. Critically important information was withheld from councillors and the public. Where was the man in charge, the Director of Planning, Rick Nethery?  

The developer, Bob Forrest, who gamed the system. He believes he can make things happen

"by leveraging our strong reputation and existing relationships with municipal staff and politicians."

Well, not this time.

(The photo right shows Forrest's right hand man, Chris Bobyk, explaining the concept to the public in April 2013 - six months before the Heritage Conservation District By-law was enacted by the slothful Mayor, Tony Van Bynen.)

Mayor Tony Van Bynen who stubbornly clung to supporting the Staff recommendation even when it had been pointed out to him the calculation on the project's density was completely bogus. When he said the Clock Tower was a great example of the intensification the old downtown needed, he really meant it.

On the positive side, we have seen councillors assert themselves. And think for themselves. The seven councillors who rejected the Clock Tower application deserve our hearty congratulations.

At last night's Council meeting, Regional Councillor John Taylor engaged with some of the major issues and made a number of insightful observations on the planning system and how it can be made better. His focus on the peer-reviews was welcome.

We can also thank the BIA and the merchants of Main Street who have done so much to build the terrific downtown over recent years.

The Heritage Advisory Committee and its Chair Athol Hart deserve a special vote of thanks for their trenchant opposition to Bob Forrest's Clock Tower project which would have resulted in the destruction of a unique and irreplaceable Townscape.

You can read the exchanges between John Taylor and Staff here together with details of the vote.

And you can read here Van Bynen's Statement to the Committee of the Whole meeting on the Clock Tower, 28 November 2016, explaining why he was supporting the staff recommendation to allow a seven storey apartment building in the heart of the Heritage Conservation District where a three storey height cap applies.

And you can read here Bob Forrest's angry letter to the Mayor and Councillors dated 28 November 2016 and my letter to the same recipients dated 4 December 2016. (Scroll to item 22 in the agenda.)

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

Update on 5 February 2020: Note: the links above are broken.

 

Details

Newmarket Council tonight confirmed that it is denying Bob Forrest's Clock Tower planning application to dump a huge condo into the heart of the Town's Heritage Conservation District. 

And councillors also rejected the so-called compromise from the Town's own planners.

more to follow tomorrow.

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

 

Details

Aurora residents living next to the former Highland Gate golf club will soon be getting the Glenway treatment.

The golf club closed for good on 9 November 2014 and the old putting greens and fairways are to disappear, giving way to 159 single detached houses and a seven storey condo. Residents have been offered a trail system and some sweeteners. Trees and bushes will be planted in great quantities to soften the impact on the eye. The developer's counsel, Mark Flowers, ludicrously describes this as a win-win. 

Flowers was addressing the OMB Hearing in the Council Chamber at Aurora Town Hall on Thursday (1 December) explaining the details of the settlement that had been agreed with the Town Of Aurora. As he speaks, he dips into the settlement brief, an intimidating three inches thick.

Glenway

The planning opinion prepared for Highland Gate Developments Inc cited the Glenway precedent.

The excellent Aurora councillor, Tom Mrakas, battled mightily on behalf of the residents but ended up on the losing side when the Council voted 6-3 to settle with the developer, Highland Gate Developments Inc. I see him perched opposite looking down on the teams of lawyers and planners.

Flowers reminds us of the many public meetings where the developer and public clashed. He freely admits that upwards of 500-600 people vocally expressed their opposition to a development that would rob them of cherished open space.  

Mrakas said the residents were "beaten into submission".

I agree.

It's Kagan again!

Now I see in front of me at the lectern the silver-tongued lawyer, Ira Kagan, who also speaks for the developer. It was the ubiquitous Kagan who masterminded Marianneville's victory at Glenway where the old fairways are now being chewed up. They are crawling with bulldozers and heavy machinery.

The procedures at the OMB Hearing are now familiar. We all stand up when the adjudicator, Ian Roe, enters the Council Chamber. He is a lawyer with a degree in philosophy. Therefore he must think before he speaks.

Professional Planning Opinions

The planners swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth when giving their professional planning opinion. What a pantomime!

It is as if their utterances are ex cathedra, unchallengeable by lesser mortals.

As it happens, Newmarket's Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, has recently been pronouncing on the OMB. 

In his piece in the ERA newspaper on 24 November 2016 he talks about the Glenway "lessons learned" meeting on 23 June 2015. 

Unfortunately, he never took the opportunity to tell us what lessons he had learned from the disaster. He simply thanked us for our attendance and said it was a  very valuable exercise.

However, in April this year the secretive retired bank manager dropped his guard and told the ERA newspaper:

"We've learned through Glenway that polarity doesn't help anybody."

Translated, this means his preference is always to do a deal with the developer. All that stuff we used to hear about "defending the official plan" is for the birds. That's yesterday's story.

OMB Summit

Van Trappist went along to the OMB Summit organised by Tom Mrakas but I don't know what he said or what advice he gave to his colleagues.

Before the last municipal election in 2014, Van Bynen promised to make OMB reform the priority of his administration. There is no evidence that he did anything at all, leaving all the heavy lifting to the then newly elected Ward 7 councillor, Christina Bisanz.

I discovered early on that Van Bynen is, for the most part, a spectator at events. Waiting for others to take the lead. Over two years ago I wrote:

"Mayor Tony Van Bynen has many fine qualities but leading from the front is not one of them. He is a process and procedure man above all."

That is still my view.

Indeed, last June, at a meeting of the Committee of the Whole, veteran councillor, Dave Kerwin scolded Van Bynen in front of a packed public gallery:

"You never show leadership. And that's what's wrong!"

Who am I to contradict the considered view of the venerable David Kerwin, the longest serving councillor in the whole of Canada?

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

  • You are here:  
  • Home