Avenues Policy Review: Etobicoke Presentation

In our area, avenues will include Dundas, Islington, Kipling, and notably, Royal York Road from Anglesey to Dundas and south of Bloor Street.

The slide deck used during the presentation on November 20, 2024 can be found here.

Additionally, here is the link to access a recording of the Etobicoke presentation and the draft Urban Structure Map. This draft map is available on the Housing Action Plan: Avenues, Mid-rise and Mixed Use Areas Study project webpage, where you can also find details of upcoming meeting dates for the second phase of consultations should you wish to participate further. Project updates will also be posted to the project webpage as they become available.

The Facts About Sidewalk Installations

There's been an avid discussion around sidewalk installations on the MINOE’s Facebook Page.

HERE ARE THE FACTS: There is a process which allows residents to have a say when roads are being reconstructed and sidewalks are being considered. Anyone can place a request for a sidewalk. They will be advised of their options, under missing sidewalk policy or if there is a road reconstruction planned in the next 5 years. If you want a sidewalk on your street you should submit a request now! Email 311@Toronto.ca.

What you do NOT want is to be removed from the process and to have blanket decisions made without consultation. Such a hard-line approach is supported by a lobbyist group called Walk Toronto. They also support installing bike lanes without any public consultation.

Do we really want city staff making the decisions that shape our neighborhood without speaking to us first?

The local Councillor has the right to take any resident's concerns, support or objections to the Transportation Department and to challenge city plans. To see how this is done: VIDEO from city council: https://youtu.be/3n8zuz-ZaA4?t=25873

Many local disabled people support no sidewalks for maneuverability reasons and this is detailed in the Kingslea Gardens RESIDENT report. It makes good reading. You can access that document by clicking on this link.

Sidewalks, if installed should be placed on the north side of the street. This is where the winter sun melts away ice and helps homeowners who have to keep it clear and safe for everyone. Trees are not messy seasonal decorations. Safety issues must include their preservation. They prevent speeding cars careening across sidewalks and lawns and into people's homes (as happened to me personally) and they provide the endless oxygen, shade and cooling we have come to rely upon. Its not an either-or discussion when debating trees/sidewalks. They need to be accommodated in a way that they can not only survive, but thrive.

Last of all there is a COST FACTOR that demonstrates that on side streets where traffic volumes are low, safety is BETTER accomplished with traffic calming measures slow down traffic enough to prevent accidents altogether.

This article is also posted on KPRI’s Facbook page at https://www.facebook.com/KPRIToronto

Residents and KPRI join forces to empower Councillor Grimes and staff

The following is from Peter Dardarian, one of the residents leading the campaign to stop the one-policy-fits-all imposition of sidewalks in Sunnylea:

Dear Neighbours:

Our action and hard work paid off! - We saved our trees! - No sidewalk on South Kingslea Drive!

On October 2/20 Toronto City Council passed a motion put forth by Councillor Mark Grimes’ to NOT install sidewalks on South Kingslea Drive (SKD). Therefore, Transportation Services will not include installation of sidewalks in the major reconstruction work on SKD between Kingslea Court and Ivy Lea Crescent in 2021.

This success was the result of 9 months of interaction between Councillor Mark Grimes’ office, South Kingslea Drive No-Sidewalks Committee (the Committee), Kingsway Park Ratepayers Inc. (KPRI) as well as phone calls and emails to Mark Grimes’ office by Sunnylea residents.

The residents of SKD did not want to stand by and watch the destruction of 12 mature trees, identified as at risk by the Forestry Dept., nor did they feel that issues with cars speeding on the road was appropriately addressed by inserting sidewalks. Sidewalks give tacit approval to the idea that the road is owned by cars. Residents feel the road is to be SHARED safely as it has been for the last 80 years by pedestrians, cyclists and the disabled. Residents should pursue traffic calming measures (e.g., speed bumps) when warranted, to create safe sharing of local roads.

A hardy thanks to sub-committee members who assisted with securing petitions and obtaining permission to install No-Sidewalk signs. We could not have developed the strong presentations without your assistance.

A huge thank you to Councillor Grimes and his staff for supporting the wishes of his constituents and persuading other Councillors to see that the new policy needs to be applied thoughtfully and selectively. This is an issue that isn't going away any time soon.

For those interested, here are the details:

BACKGROUND

1) In January 2020 a Community News flyer was issued to SKD residences advising that a sidewalk installation is planned for SKD in 2021, bundled with a road reconstruction and water main project.

2) This would proceed without advance consultation owing to the fact that the City installs sidewalks routinely with road reconstruction projects as a result of policy change in July 2019.

3) This news was communicated by KPRI to its members and strongly objected to by Sunnylea residents.

COURSE OF ACTION

1) January 2020: Residents of SKD and neighbouring streets inundated Mark Grimes’ office with phone calls and emails objecting to the sidewalk installation.

2) February: A small group of SKD residents enlisted KPRI support to halt the arbitrary installation of sidewalks on SKD.

3) March: a No-Sidewalks Committee of 3 SKD residents was formed to challenge the City on installation of sidewalks.

4) The Committee and KPRI began direct communication with Councillor Mark Grimes’ office requesting meetings/conference calls to obtain the Councilor’s support.

5) Under guidance of KPRI a hard copy petition was designed targeting both SKD and the greater neighbourhood residences.

6) 32 of 37 residences on SKD (86.5%) signed hard copy petitions objecting to addition of sidewalks.

7) 104 residences (178 residents) on greater neighbourhood streets signed hard copy petitions objecting to addition of sidewalks.

8) KPRI simultaneously instituted an online petition objecting to addition of sidewalks on SKD resulting in over 2,200 signatures.

9) Street signs for No-Sidewalks were purchased by KPRI and donated to petition signers at their request.

10) With COVID making it difficult to arrange face to face meetings, a conference call was arranged between Mark Grimes’ office, the Committee and KPRI. Councillor Grimes gave us his full support, and assisted us in obtaining important details of the City’s plans.

11) Councillor Mark Grimes and his staff put forward a Motion to not proceed with the installation of sidewalks for numerous reasons including impacts on mature trees and neighbourhood character, low-volume roadway used by local traffic, no safety concerns, creating a heat sink, replacing grass with cement, etc.

12) Evidence-based document was prepared by the Committee and KPRI and submitted to Councillor’s office to assist him during City Council meeting.

GOING FORWARD

1) City policy is to normally install sidewalks on at least one side of a street whenever there is a road reconstruction. However, this policy is subject to review when there are anomalous issues such as potential threats to trees, etc.

2) When other streets are notified of a road reconstruction, they may wish to discuss the matter immediately with their Councillor. As we found in this case, it’s important for residents to act immediately and to work together with common purpose.

SIGNS – No-Sidewalks

Volunteers will pick up your No-Sidewalk sign and return it to KPRI for re-use when the next road reconstruction is scheduled.

Thank you,

1) SKD No-Sidewalks Committee- Peter Dardarian, Paul Cordingley, Regina Jokel

2) Kingsway Park Rate Payers Inc. – Fiona Campbell, President, Steve Rankine, Jennifer Gray


Precedents .... Do they count at the OMB or the new Tribunal?

One of the frequent and logical concerns of residents about development on Bloor Street is the possibility of OMB decisions creating precedents that would pave the way for more such developments being allowed by the OMB. 

Certainly such decisions would form a precedent in the minds of residents and developers, but what about where it really counts .... at the OMB?   Is there a real danger of an OMB decision being used as a precedent for influencing similar future OMB hearings?   This is a major question whose answer is, thankfully, "no".

The OMB, because it is an administrative, quasi-judicial tribunal and not a judicial court of law, is not bound by previous decisions made by its Board. This is reflected in the following two quotes from the OMB.

"It is submitted by some party to almost every hearing before this Board, that its
decision will create an inappropriate precedent. On this issue the Board must note that
one panel of this Board is not bound by the decision of another panel; each case which
comes before the Board has a unique set of facts; each case must be decided on its
merits, taking into account the policy regime in effect at the time of the application.  (February 6, 2008, CASE NO(S). PL070056)

Notwithstanding that there are planning proposals which are seen to establish “good precedence”, both municipal planning authorities and the Board are obligated to assess the planning merits of each application on an individual basis."  (September 9, 2015 CASE NO(S). PL150058)

Imagine if precedence forced future OMB decisions.    As the trend has been the OMB deciding in favour of developers, this would be disastrous for good community planning.  As stated by the Regional Planning Commissioners of Ontario:

"A decision related to a particular building or site should not bind future decisions, even where the context is similar. If OMB decisions were bound by precedent, the accumulation of OMB decisions would soon entirely supersede municipally-led comprehensive planning. "
(RPCO Research Report, Reforming the Ontario Municipal Board: Five Actions for Change, FINAL REPORT | August 31, 2016

So, thankfully residents do not have to worry about this issue of precedence when it comes to OMB decisions about proposed developments in our Kingsway-Sunnylea area.

And Now for Some Changes

The Ontario government launched a review of the scope and effectiveness of the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in June 2016.  The result was the introduction of Bill 139 - the Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017.  Bill 139 received Royal Assent on December 12, 2017 and makes transformative changes to Ontario's land use planning and appeal system.  These changes include:

  • creating the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) to replace the Ontario Municipal Board

  • establishing a Local Planning Appeal Support Centre to provide legal and planning help to Ontarians who want to participate in the tribunal processes

  • supporting clearer and more timely decision making

  • reducing the ability of the tribunal to overturn municipal decisions that adhere to the municipal official plans, provincial plans, and the Provincial Policy Statement

  • giving municipal elected officials greater control over local planning, resulting in fewer decisions being appealed

These changes will come into force on a date to be named by proclamation, expected in the spring of 2018.  A new regulation under the Planning Act is proposed to ensure that there are rules dealing with the transition between the old system and the new system.

Because of the major changes that are taking place to overhaul the OMB, many developers rushed their applications/appeals for their projects in order to have them processed by the OMB rather than the LPAT.  Any appeals filed to the OMB before December 12, 2017 will be processed by the OMB. If a complete application was submitted to the OMB before December 12, 2017 and an appeal is filed prior to proclamation (spring 2018) then the file will still be processed by the OMB. All other appeals will be processed by the LPAT.  These proposed transitional rules are still subject to change and are not set in stone. 

Let's hope that the processes of this new system also continue the trend of non-precedence. A search through the wording of the official Bill 139 for the word "precedence" or "precedent" yields zero results.  

So far so good.

Steve Rankine

KPRI Director - Membership

 

Volunteers Wanted!

The Kingsway Ratepayers is looking for volunteers. We need broad perspectives and folks who will attend meetings and keep us all updated on what’s coming down the pike at warp speed towards all of us. We are an informal group, very friendly, meeting once a month or two, and happy to see new faces. Email Fiona@bermudarentals.com or call 416-232-2243.

Genealogy and Family History course

A quick reminder that we are running an eight-week course this fall (on Wednesday afternoons starting on October 19) on Basic Genealogy and Family History, which may be of interest to some of your association members.

Below is a brief summary of the course:

Basic Genealogy and Family History
Instructor: Jane E. MacNamara
Wednesdays 2-4 pm: October 19, 26, November 2, 9, 16, 23, 30, and December 7
Eglinton St George’s United Church, 35 Lytton Blvd, Toronto
This course is designed for those just beginning to research or looking to upgrade basic research skills. It will cover terminology, types of sources, the use of on-line resources, libraries and archives, including LDS Family History Centres, and record-keeping – to help you “think like a genealogist”. Techniques discussed will apply to a wide variety of geographic areas, providing you with a good base for further courses.

I've also attached a letter-sized poster for the course and full details are posted on our Branch website at http://torontofamilyhistory.org/learn.

We appreciate your support of our Branch activities.

Gwyneth Pearce

Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review: Planning for Health, Prosperity, and Growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2015-2041.

By KPRI Director Gail Anderson

The 87 recommendations of the David Crombie led review deal with updating 4 existing land use plans:

The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, The Greenbelt Plan‎, The Oakridges Moraine Conservation Plan and The Niagara Escarpment Plan.( http://www.mah.gov.on.ca‎)

The government is proposing changes to the 4 land use plans based on the recommendations and feedback on the Growth Plan. Some of the recommendations related to intensification, green space and the decision-making powers may impact our communities. ‎A recent editorial in the Toronto Star encouraged people to respond to the review recommendations and government proposed changes.  

Written responses with comments and feedback are invited by September 30, 2016. The feedback can be provided through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website or can be mailed to: Land Use Planning Review, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Ontario Growth Secretariat, 777 Bay St. Suite 425, 4th floor.  For more detailed information, call 1-800-665-1120 or email landuseplanningreview@ontario.ca

Section 37 Meeting

Councillor Di Ciano has advised through E-Newsletters and email responses the Section 37 process. In order to clarify the outstanding misconceptions Justin will be holding a "once only" Community Meeting with Planning and Finance staff in the late autumn of 2016.  Stay tuned for details.