- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Congratulations to Aurora Newmarket MPP Chris Ballard on his promotion into the Government as Minister of Housing. He will be a busy boy.
But this raises the question of what happens to Bill 42 - his private member’s Bill which would mandate the election of the Chair of York Region in 2018. At the moment, the Chair is indirectly elected by York Regional Council. And they like the cosy status quo.
As a Government Minister, Ballard is no longer a “private member” and in the ordinary course of things his Bill 42 would continue to appear on the Order and Notices Paper. In the absence of a motion to withdraw the Bill, it would just sit there, going nowhere. The Bill would then die at prorogation or dissolution.
As it happens, I gave oral evidence to the Committee examining the Bill on 2 March 2016 and, for this reason amongst others, I feel an attachment to Ballard’s Bill which I would like to see survive and become law.
The answer is for Ballard to arrange for another MPP (of any Party) to take the Bill over and become its sponsor. This could be done simply enough by the House agreeing a motion to transfer sponsorship. But here is the rub. The motion to transfer would have to be moved by the Government.
So, I suppose the fate of Ballard’s Bill 42 rests with Kathleen Wynne.
Last month I wrote to Chris (who is my MPP) asking how the Government’s proposed ban on corporate and union donations to candidates running for election at provincial and municipal level would impact on Bill 42. The questions are straightforward and obvious but the answers, I fear, are less so.
How will this work in practice at municipal level where political parties do not organize?
I understand a public subsidy will be going to provincial political parties to compensate for the ending of corporate and union donations. It will be based on the votes received at the preceding election. But how are municipal candidates going to be helped, if at all?
As I tap this out I am thinking of your own Bill 42 mandating the election of the regional chair. The electorate is huge – according to York Region it will be around 750,000.
How are candidates expected to finance their campaigns? Will there be any kind of public subsidy? If so, what form will it take?
I know Chris has a lot on his plate at the moment but I am sure he will find time to reply to these points. When he does, I shall post his answers here.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Big decisions on Regional Express Rail (RER) that will affect the shape of development in Newmarket for decades to come are likely to be on the agenda of the Metrolinx Board when it next meets on 28 June 2016.
But I could be wrong.
With Metrolinx we always get the dance of the seven veils. No-one can be certain what is going to be revealed next.
We still don’t know, for example, what Metrolinx plans to do about grade separations at Mulock Drive (photo below) and Davis Drive. Both are needed. It is inconceivable that a fast rail service could operate through Newmarket with the old level crossings still in place, with their quaint bells and flashing red lights. 
Transport Canada’s guidelines set thresholds where rail/road grade separations may be warranted. If this “exposure index” (daily road vehicle traffic x daily train traffic) exceeds 200,000 then grade separation should be considered. Here are the current figures for three key road/rail intersections:
Mulock Drive 458,400
Davis Drive 396,000
Green Lane (EG) 464,400
And what is going to happen at Water Street and Timothy Street where the GO tracks cross local roads which are the responsibility of Newmarket, not the Region?
(And, to complicate things further, the Town is considering a new parking lot alongside the rail tracks at Water Street.)
A new GO rail station at Mulock Drive?
We still don’t know if there will be a new GO rail station at Mulock Drive. I’d say fat chance.
The Town never did any work on the proposal which simply appears as a dot on a map.
The land so identified as the most likely site for the new GO rail station was up for sale last year and has now been sold.
I would be truly astonished if the Town were the buyer.
The Town has shown absolutely no interest in acquiring the land.
(The question is: should I fork out $30 to the Land Registry – up from $8 - to have that confirmed?)
Regional Express Rail on the cheap
An update on RER progress that went to last week’s York Region Committee of the Whole makes depressing reading. The report says:
“The Initial Business Case outlines Metrolinx’s recommended service plan and infrastructure requirements for each of the GO rail corridors within the RER program including Barrie, Richmond Hill and Stouffville GO corridors in York Region…. It does not include all infrastructure required to mitigate the impacts of RER to the Regional transportation system or local communities.”
Put simply, Metrolinx is trying to do RER on the cheap. The Region says:
“For Metrolinx to successfully deliver Regional Express Rail they will need to do more than expand existing GO rail service levels.”
The Region has a shopping list of things that need to be done to make RER deliver the results as intended. There are 19 level crossings on Regional roads that need to be improved. There are overpasses and underpasses that need attention. There are new GO rail stations. And much more besides.
“Misalignment” between Metrolinx and the Region
In a delightful understatement, the Region’s Commissioner of Transportation Services, Daniel Kostopoulos, told the Committee of the Whole on 9 June 2016 there was a “misalignment” between Metrolinx and York Region on key recommendations.
As yet, Metrolinx has only identified four level crossings in York Region where road/rail grade separation is promised: Rivermeade Road, Rutherford Road, Langstaff Road and Steeles Avenue. Not one in Newmarket though Metrolinx admits the exact number of grade separations has yet to be decided.
Regional staff and Metrolinx are looking at ways of sharing the huge costs of road rail separation and at new sources of finance. York Region staff expect a report to go to Council in the fall.
Elsewhere, unfortunately, the die is already cast for major elements of the RER program on the Barrie line.
Van Bynen throws in the towel
All-day two-way GO trains every 15 minutes will run from Union Station to Aurora. Newmarket gets a 30 minutes service in the weekday rush hour and then a 60 minute service during the day, in the evenings, and at weekends. There will be twin tracks to Aurora and then a lonely single track, with passing places, north to Barrie.
Our Mayor, Tony Van Bynen, never one to rattle the bars of the cage, meekly accepted this second fiddle service to and from Newmarket. On 9 November 2015 he told Metrolinx’s Chief Planning Officer, Leslie Woo:
“In my own mind the difference between a 15 minute and 30 minute service doesn’t change the world immensely although I think eventually we’ll need to get there. But I’d rather see us easing into that, responding to the demand as we go forward.”
That statement is entirely typical of the man. If the difference between 15 minutes and 30 minutes is inconsequential, can the same be said of 15 minutes and 60 minutes? Because that’s what we are getting outside peak periods.
Van Bynen is by temperament a cautious gradualist. He will never loudly and insistently bang the drum to get attention – even when the facts are on his side.
Newmarket is, of course, a designated place to grow which will see its population increase dramatically over the medium term. Over 30,000 new residents are expected in the Yonge/Davis corridors alone. And our neighbour, East Gwillimbury, will see the greatest percentage population growth in York Region hitting 95,000 people by 2041.
Not making the case for twin tracking north from Aurora – at the very least to East Gwillimbury - is a missed opportunity.
And a big one.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Dave Kerwin, a Newmarket councillor since the dawn of time, has no regrets about challenging Mayor Tony Van Bynen to throw him out of the Committee of the Whole on 30 May.
Kerwin, incensed at the way residents were being treated by Tony Van “tick-box” Bynen, got to his feet and started shouting at the Mayor at the top of his voice, berating him for the way he was chairing the meeting.
Kerwin was clearly fired up by the waves of applause from an appreciative audience. Van Bynen usually tries hard to keep the atmosphere in Committee and Council meetings reverential with no applause allowed.
Just before the start of this week’s Council meeting (7 June) Kerwin recalled the incident in front of a large group of residents who had turned up to support a delegation on the Clock Tower.
Laughing heartily, he boomed:
“I don’t regret a word of it!”
Kerwin claims the Mayor never shows any leadership.
Later, 94 year old Clock Tower campaigner Margaret Davis formally presented her petition against the proposed development. The petition, with over 1,200 signatures, is close to six times bigger than the rival one in favour of the development.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
I hear Neil and Chrisula Selfe, who bought the King George School on Park Avenue in 2011 for $1, 275, 000, are selling it to Sam Reisman of Rose Corporation. 
The old school has been empty for years and parts of it are now gently crumbling away. I am told the plan is for townhouses and luxury condos in the revamped school building.
The old barbarian, Bob Forrest, had discussions with Rose Corporation when looking for a partner for the controversial Clock Tower development – which increasingly looks like it is dead in the water.
The Rose Corporation is the developer behind the 15 Storey rental apartment building on Davis Drive.
Sam Reisman founded the Rose Corporation in 1982, naming it after his wife, Rose, the celebrity chef.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
- Written by Gordon Prentice
Parking has been as issue in Newmarket for at least a century. We have this on the authority of Dave Kerwin no less, the longest serving councillor in Canada, perhaps the Western Hemisphere. He tells the Committee of the Whole last Monday (30 May 2016 – agenda item 10) that, as a member of the Newmarket Historical Society, he can state without fear of contradiction that:
“In Newmarket for the past 100 years there has been as issue with parking in the Downtown core.”
This is the same Dave Kerwin who told the Committee of the Whole on 31 August last year that he never has any difficulty finding somewhere to park downtown.
Personally, I think consistency is an over-rated quality in politicians. The fact that Kerwin bounces around all over the place hasn’t damaged his electability. He says he is “unorthodox”. True. But why stop there? He can also be irascible, curmudgeonly and theatrically angry when it suits. He is also a flamboyant flatterer. 
Nine months ago at that August meeting, Kerwin-the-Contrarian took issue with Joe Sponga who was complaining about lack of enforcement of parking regulations. Last Monday, Joe was playing the same old record again but with an interesting new twist. Maybe parking spaces are not needed at all!
We can learn from Venice says Sponga
He tells us he recently visited the oldest continuously operating restaurant in Venice (as one does) which goes back to 1600 and he saw the future.
“Not only aren’t there any cars - or a parking lot for cars – there is not even parking for boats! Yet people are visiting this restaurant all the time for the food is delicious.”
Joe says we gotta go for a “sustainable solution”. The way forward is to go for high end restaurants. As soon as you pull in they step out and ask if they can park your car. Then at the end of your meal when you get your check, they get the valet to bring your car to the front door. You feel you’ve had a higher level of service and, sure, you’re gonna pay more. But that’s the future – “valetisation”. (I made the word up.)
Joe’s Ward 5 covers the historic downtown and he isn’t going to be voting for any parking solutions that are not sustainable. 
He and the Mayor, for their own reasons, are the only two voting against John Taylor’s proposal to boost parking provision downtown by extending the car park at the entrance to Fairy Lake, adding 33 spaces next to the rail track (photo right). Seven old and diseased trees will have to go but there will be 21 sturdy young replacements. Taylor, enthusiastically supported by Dave Kerwin, also wants another 22 spaces carved out of Council owned greenery behind the Cachet restaurant costing approximately $150,000 (photo at top).
Sand in the gears
This is too much for Van Bynen who spends the entire meeting throwing sand into the gears. Why not wait to see what effect the additional 33 spaces will have before we chop down trees behind Cachet? He tells us we are getting mixed messages from the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority who must first agree any parking on a flood plain.
He wants to investigate feasibility and costs. Now he is gazing at the tea leaves at the bottom of his tea cup. He tells us he sees a lot of unknowns. He sees options that he wants to explore.
This infuriates Kerwin. He thinks Van Bynen is always trying to put a spoke in the wheel whenever someone comes up with a good idea. In Kerwin’s mind, Van Bynen is a born procrastinator, prevaricator and equivocator. Kerwin tells us the Mayor really believes the land behind Cachet looks like a junk heap. Van Bynen bristles.
“I didn’t say it looked like a junk heap!”
Kerwin, who sits on the board of the Conservation Authority, says they are fine with the proposal. Taylor weighs in saying he has an e mail from the Chief Executive of the LSRCA and they are OK about it. Taylor tells the Mayor respectfully it is a non-issue.
Our success has created the problem
Now Kerwin, warming to his theme, tells us
“Our success in the downtown core has created our problem. We have revitalized the downtown core. That’s incredible! We’ve brought people down to the downtown core! They are going to Cachet. They are going to Hungry Brew Hops. They are going to Made in Mexico. They are going to the Fish and Chips place…”
Tom Vegh says he will be supporting Taylor because the Old Town Hall, opening in September, will be a very successful venue and will add to parking pressures.
We learn that staff are to be asked to prepare an analysis of parking at the Old Town Hall.
On cue, Kelly Broome-Plumley, who is also in favour of Taylor’s recommendations, innocently asks if this analysis is not something that should have been done before. Without meaning to, she scores a bullseye. Why was nothing done when the Council was deciding to do up the Old Town Hall?
“Just curious” she says, diffidently.
We now sit through a very, very long pause…..
The Mayor invites one of the Town’s top officials, Peter Noehammer, to respond. He says he will “take a stab at it”.
“I guess the short answer is the Town did conduct a parking study of the downtown area. I don’t believe the report specifically looked at it when the peak events at the Old Town Hall would be held. Just more in the context of what the existing parking was and how it could be configured to accommodate future growth like restaurants and things like that….”
Ah!
Downtown is thriving
Now Jane Twinney reveals she, too, is lining up to support Taylor. She tells us the downtown is an “incredible thriving area” and the Old Town Hall is going to be well used. But she laments the length of time it takes to get anything done under Van Bynen’s sclerotic leadership. She is fed up with constant delays. The parking report took six months!
“Sometimes we just need to make decisions about things!”
The Mayor is not at all happy with the way the debate is unfolding.
“I am not sure that I agree that parking behind Cachet is going to provide any relief for the Old Town Hall. Or Joia. I don’t believe that would provide any relief for those two locations… Burble… Burble… Burble… ”
The cautious Van Bynen wants to adopt a wait and see approach. We should go for the 33 spaces at Fairy Lake but put a hold on Cachet parking and, while we are at it, let’s examine the options for temporary parking structures. He wants another report! He warns councillors they will regret it if they press ahead and pave over the green space behind Cachet.
Christina Bisanz, who also supports Taylor, wants to know how much it will all cost and if the land is home to any rare threatened creatures. She looks at the Mayor as she mentions the salamander.
Now Dave Kerwin is getting increasingly exasperated. He will not allow the Mayor to out-manoeuvre him again. He brings to bear his impressive knowledge of arboriculture. He says the trees behind Cachet are nothing more than Manitoba Maples – an invasive species! He wants them chopped down and replaced by beautiful Colorado Blue Spruce, which sounds a tad foreign to me.
The Mayor, now fighting a rearguard action, tells us taking the trees down would have a very significant impact on the landscape.
Joe Sponga is Van Bynen’s only ally – but for different reasons. Joe tells us he will not support any of the recommendations. Joe wants underground parking on the Community Centre lands.
Respect
Taylor shakes his head sorrowfully while telling us he respects Cllr Sponga. With that out of the way, he tells us why he disagrees with Sponga.
“An underground parking solution on the Community Centre lands is at least five years away.”
That is absurdly optimistic.
Taylor is on safer ground sticking to his line that parking in the downtown is always going to be work in progress.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Joe Sponga has posted his own thoughts on downtown parking prompted by a story in the Era.
Attached is the story on the proposed parking solutions for Main Street. Unfortunately my statements are not reflected in the article, as the Ward Councillor and a long time resident of Historic Downtown Newmarket, I felt I should post my opinion. I support adding 200-300 Public Parking Spots split between above ground at the Community Centre Lands and underground at the Parking Lot in front of the OTH within five years, I cannot support grading, draining and paving portions of Fairy Lake for a mere 53 spots that will be tied up immediately and will make no difference now or tomorrow.
Green Space, does not have to be pretty or used in order to serve its purpose as Green Space, that is its natural state. I am surprised at the LSRCA for giving their nod of approval.
Sustainable Communities, such as ours, look for long term solutions that will benefit us and our children for many years, that is smart and sustainable. Valet Service by the Restaurants, above and below ground dedicate, urban, Green-P type parking, and maintaining and sustaining both our Green Space and Main Street are the solutions I would support.
Did anyone realize that five years ago we added 43 parking spots in P3? Have they made a difference? Should we do the same at the expense of Fairy Lake?
In sum, I support long term, sustainable parking solutions that make a difference. Not 22 parking spots behind Cache in Fairy Lake and not 33 at the entrance of our same Park.
My humble opinion.
Page 199 of 281