Current News Articles of Interest to SERRA
FEDERATION OF NORTH TORONTO RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATIONS
January 6, 2008Mayor David Miller
Toronto City Hall
Re: Guidelines for Identifying and Processing Planning Matters of City-wide Interest and Cross-Boundary Issues - Planning & Growth Management Committee Item PG13.4
Dear Mayor Miller,
We are writing on behalf of the Federation of North Toronto Residents’ Associations (FoNTRA)* and its 24 member associations (see Appendix).
FoNTRA's work to improve the new Official Plan (OP) and related guidelines reflect our belief that Toronto can achieve better development. Our main issue is not whether Toronto will grow, but how. FoNTRA believes that sustainable development in Toronto requires environmental balance, fiscal viability, infrastructure investment and social renewal.
We ask that you support the February 13, 2008 decision of the Planning and Growth Management Committee (P&GM) in regard to the Centralized Planning Guidelines (Item PG13.4). In particular, we strongly urge you and Council to support the P&GM resolution that: "City Council adopt the modified Guidelines contained in Revised Attachment 1 submitted by Councillor Vaughan, which set out a process for dealing with City-wide planning matters."
The P&GM resolution ensures that ward councillors and elected bodies (Community Councils as well as City Council) will be assured a key role in the decision-making process with respect to determining whether planning matters are local or city-wide in nature. Local matters will remain local and city-wide matters are clearly identified. In the case of disputes, elected representatives and not planning staff will make the final decision.
Kindly advise us of Council's decision on this particular issue.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
George Milbrandt
Co-Chair, FoNTRA
193 Wanless Ave.
Toronto, M4N 1W4
del@ican.net
416-481-4190
Peter Baker
Co-Chair, FoNTRA
124 Sherwood Ave.
Toronto, M4P 2A7
peterwbaker@rogers.com 416-932-8241
| cc: | City Clerk, Ulli Watkiss City Council FoNTRA representatives Other Interested Individuals |
Appendix
The members of the Federation of North Toronto Residents’ Associations (FoNTRA)* agree to work jointly to preserve and enhance the quality of life that makes our area such an enjoyable place to live, shop and work. FoNTRA will be dedicated to safeguarding the sustainability of our neighbourhoods. We believe in the fairness and democracy of Toronto’s political system. We also believe it is important that residents and neighbourhoods have early and meningful input in terms of planning issues which are of direct relevance to their community.
FoNTRA’s member organizations are:
ABC Residents’ Association
Avenue Road & Eglinton Community Association
Bedford Park Residents’ Association
Deer Park Ratepayers’ Group
Don Mills Residents Inc.
Edwards Gardens Neighbourhood Association
FoNTRA Associate Members-at-Large
Lawrence Park Ratepayers’ Association
Forest Hill Homeowners' Association
Lawrence Park-Bayview Property Owners’ Association
Leaside Property Owners’ Association
Lytton Park Residents’ Organization Inc.
Moore Park Residents’ Association
North Rosedale Ratepayers' Association
Oriole Park Association
St. Andrew's Ratepayers Association
Sherwood Park Residents’ Association
South Armour Heights Residents' Association
South Eglinton Ratepayers' & Residents' Association
South Hill District Home Owners’ Association
Summerhill Residents' Association
Teddington Park Residents’ Association
York Mills Ratepayers' Association
York Mills Valley Association
* The 23 area residents’ associations and the FoNTRA Associate Members-at-Large comprise the 24 member organizations of FoNTRA. In total, these associations represent at least 150,000 residents within their boundaries.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improvements to Torontos New Official Plan: Some Key Neighbourhood and Related Policies (August 2007)
January 8, 2008Introduction
FoNTRA's work to improve the new Official Plan (OP or Plan), and its consequent legal bills in supporting CORRA's appeal of the OP at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), reflectourbelief thatToronto can achieve better development. Our mainissue is not whether Toronto will grow, but how. FoNTRA believes that sustainable development in Toronto requiresenvironmental balance, fiscal viability, infrastructure investment and social renewal.
William Roberts (CORRA's lawyer) and George Belza(development consultant) worked diligently to rectify problems with Torontos new OP since it was originally approved by City Council in November 2002. As briefly summarized below, they achieveda wide range ofimprovements toNeighbourhood protection and other policies of this Plan.
Summary of Improvements
- Safeguards on the intrusion of mega-buildings into neighbourhoods. The originally approved Plan's allowance for tall buildings at subway intersections and other designated growthcentres hadinadequate safeguardsover the spread of buildings intolow-rise/single-family residential areas. The Plans provisions have been strengthened in this regard.
- Additional neighbourhood protections. Several new policies were added to the OP to further ensurethat developmentof lands adjacent to Neighbourhoods (commercial areas along major roadways / arterial streets) will be carefully controlled. Other improvements include better protection of Neighbourhoodswith major roadways / arterial streets (Avenue Road south of Lawrence, Lawrence east & west of Yonge, Mt. Pleasant south of Lawrence, Oriole Parkway south of Eglinton, etc.).
- Clarity of Official Plan maps. Since there were no local streets or a scale on the original land-use maps of the new OP, boundaries between Neighbourhoods, Apartment Neighbourhoods, and Mixed Use Areas (commercial areas) were difficult to determine. This vagueness could have resulted in costly challenges at the OMB in terms of the location, height and density of potential developments. With the addition of local streets and a scale to the new OP land-use maps, they are much more accurate as well as easier to read.
- Improved payments from developers to neighbourhoods affected by large developments. FoNTRA continues to support efforts to increase development charges -- still at levels in Toronto far below most other regions in the GTA -- to better reflect the resulting infrastructure costs to Toronto. In addition, strengthened Section 37 Plan policies haveimproved the City's abilitytoimpose appropriate and realistic fees for increased heights and densities to helpthe surrounding community better adjust to the additional population and traffic as a result of large developments in excess of the OP and Zoning By-laws.
Conclusion
As a limited example of some specific Plan improvements related to stable residential Neighbourhoods, copied below (and attached as a 5 pg. "Word" file) are twenty of the many new and improved OP policies that are the outcome of the work of William Roberts and George Belza.
These new and improved policies were first approved by City Council and subsequently approved by the OMB on July 6, 2006. Also included in this e-mail are additionalpolicies 5.1.1.1, 5.1.1.6 and 5.1.1.7 (regarding Section 37) subsequently approved by Council and the OMB.
William Roberts and George Belza continue their work to further improve aspects of the new Plan, including the "Protocol for Negotiating Section 37 Community Benefits" as well as the "Complete Development Application" policies.
It should be noted that, to date, a vast majority of OP appeals to the OMB are based on the old Plan. When the new OP was initially appealed, in early 2003, many developers / land-owners included their sites as part of that appeal process. As a result, when OP amendments are proposed for these particilar sites as part of a development proposal, the old Plan policies apply at any OMB hearing.
As well, included (as part of the attached file), is a brief Plan outline intended to provide some context to the previously mentioned policy improvements.
Finally, as a reminder, copied below are FoNTRA's comments / recommendations regarding OMB reform. Unfortunately, these recommendations were not included in Bill 51 - the provincial OMB reform legislation.
Best regards, Peter Baker & George Milbrandt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 Capital Budget requires homeowners and tenants to continue to subsidize the development industry to the tune of $277 million!
January 6, 2008FoNTRA Representatives and Others,
For Immediate Release:
December 12, 2007 – The $1.6 billion capital budget approved yesterday by Toronto City Council once again relies heavily on debt financing and will see individual property taxpayers, homeowners and tenants, continuing to pick up the lion’s share of growth related infrastructure costs in 2008.
According to the capital budget, the City will spend $308 million providing new infrastructure to accommodate the growth brought on by new development in 2008. The development industry will contribute $31 million through development charges, but the remainder, a staggering $277 million dollars plus interest will be paid for by property taxpayers.
“The Mayor’s capital budget again unfairly forces taxpayers to pay for about 90% of growth related costs, leaving development industry to cover only 10% of these costs through development charges,” said Councillor Cliff Jenkins (Ward 25). He has long advocated significantly increasing the development charges levy. “This means that for 2008 alone, the average home in Toronto will be paying $36 a year for the next ten years to cover what essentially amounts to a subsidy to the development industry.”
However, when Jenkins questioned Mayor Miller during the budget debate about his support for the idea of significantly increasing development charges, the response was luke warm.
“I asked him whether he would consider petitioning the Province for changes to the Development Charges Act that would allow us to recover a much greater portion of the $308 million. I even suggested he lead a ‘Fair Development Charge Now’ campaign, like the 'One-Cent-Now' campaign, but he declined.”
While Jenkins was disappointed with the Mayor's reluctance to take a leadership position on the development charge issue, which he sees as a fundamental issue of fairness for property taxpayers, he indicated he was not surprised.
“There is an unwillingness by the Mayor and his supporters to look much beyond debentured debt to finance capital infrastructure,” said Jenkins. “Regrettably, that has led the City down a path where each year we are diverting more money from operational services to make up the shortfall in capital investment.”
“We shouldn’t really be doing that when it comes to growth-related infrastructure. Growth ought to pay for itself so that the burden arising from development related costs does not largely fall on existing residents in the form of higher taxes and user fees as they do now.”
While critics argue that raising development charges has the potential to reduce Toronto’s booming housing market, Jenkins is skeptical.
“Toronto’s residential development charges remain at a fraction of many neighbouring GTA municipalities. If you look at the statistics, the fastest growing municipalities include those with the highest residential development charges (Markham, Brampton, Richmond Hill and Vaughan).”
“This surging tax burden and increasingly strained infrastructure in Toronto contrast starkly with the lower taxes for similar-sized properties and better community facilities elsewhere in the GTA. Higher residential development charges in Toronto will reduce the pressures for higher residential property taxes while reducing the strains from population growth on the City’s infrastructure.”
Media Contact: Councillor Cliff Jenkins, 416-395-6408