Gpa statutory public meeting presentation  january 7 2013 - v4.3
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Gpa statutory public meeting presentation january 7 2013 - v4.3

  • 201 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: News & Politics
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
201
On Slideshare
201
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Good evening Mayor Van Bynen and fellow Councillors and members of staff.I’m Ron Kassies, Chair of the GPA and with me is Christina Bisanz, Vice Chair of the GPA.We are please that you have given us this opportunity to speak before you this evening.We would also request that we be given 15 minutes tonight instead of 10 minutes due to the size of the group we represent.
  • We used to have thisWe don’t deserve this!There is no need for development.
  • Our agenda is in three parts as you can see on the screen before you
  • The Glenway Preservation Association is incorporated and is the only registered association representing Glenway.We have over 50 active volunteers and a petition of 1,500 signatures from residents opposing the development proposal.Through our regular communication we reach 700 households and had more than 300 residents at our recent public meeting in November.We are the public voice of the community as shown by the approach we have taken.
  • Protecting the green space that has been, and remains, a key objective within the Town’s Official PlanPreserving quality of lifestyle that brought us to Glenway - and to NewmarketProtecting the investment in our homesSafeguard the neighbourhood environmentPrevent negative impact to the quality and cost of existing and planned infrastructure that this proposal would bring about
  • We are not here tonight to talk about:How inconsistent the proposed high rise condos and semi-detached housing is to the lazy flowing quiet road network, large lots, mature trees and single family detached homes that is Glenway.How obvious is it that thousands of additional vehicles will add to congestion, pollution and safety. How many vehicle accidents will there be on Eagle, Crossland Gate, and Alex Doner! Will our children still be able to walk to and from school!
  • We are not here tonight to talk about: Unavoidable issues with Glenway unique storm water management system. limited sewage allocation significant disruption to a stable, planned neighborhood uniquely conceived and designed around the open green space of the golf course accelerated obsolescence and strain on existing infrastructure and services. And increased taxes on Newmarket residents which ensues from an insufficient funding formula insuring enrolment sufficient to maintain quality education within walking distance for our elementary and high school aged children. <Hold up copy of YRDSB letter regarding the request for an elementary school within the proposal>These are clearly all issues that concern all of us - and more - in this current proposal. BUT RATHER THAN FOCUSING ON THE FLAWED PLANNING DETAILS OF THIS PROPOSAL, WE’D LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT THE HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE RATIONALE FOR THE PROPOSAL IN THE FIRST PLACE
  • So here’s what we are going to talk about:The rationale for this proposal is highly questionable for both the community and the Town of NewmarketThe real objectives of the Places to Grow ActThat there is more than enough development to meet targeted growth and the requirements of Places to Grow. The OP has already received approval at the Regional level.The Developers and their approach in our community: we’re going to talk about our experience in dealing with these people - especially in the context of other developers we’ve encounteredAnd finally, the fact that Glenway was green before green was a colour
  • The proposal is inappropriate for the community and the Town of NewmarketBECAUSE IT’S:Contrary to Official PlanNot located within Secondary Growth Plan’s Yonge Davis corridorDoes not adequately incorporate the planned growth in this areaEliminates valuable green space for future residents’ use. By 2026, the increased population & vehicular density in this area will require a ‘safety valve’ of green space for this community - regardless of its configuration (ie. golf course, parkland, etc.)Does not realistically plan for infrastructure ‘stress’ (traffic, schooling, water management, safety, congestion etc.)
  • We agree with the current Official Plan. It has created a growth plan that meets the requirements and guidelines set out by the Places to Grow act: intensification, transit, and focus on Yonge/Davis corridor growth We encourage the Town to strive to meet acceptable density targets laid out for such intensification in those areas approved and planned for future developmentAND, we support the Town completely in their plan to preserve our green space and spare our stable, long-standing community from the upheaval of this unnecessary development The Objective of the Places to Grow act is to guide municipal decisions around growth targets and intensification The Objective is NOT to dictate HOW the Towns grow, but to provide guidance & targets The Town’s plan and planned growth already has Regional approval and is on (actually, over) target According to the Developer, their proposal ‘helps fulfill the direction of the Growth Plan. It provides for significant growth within part of the existing built-up area of Newmarket. It will assist in meeting the Provincial targets for intensification’ WE REALLY DON’T NEED THIS TYPE OF HELP.
  • There is more than enough development to exceed growth commitmentsIf we look at just the sampling of current developments that are consistent to the Town and Region’s Planning we are just about at our 2026 growth target.Mandate is for the town to grow from 85,000 residents today to 98,000 or 13,000 more by 2026Properties in the North West and South East account for approximately 7,000 more residentsProperties on Yonge and Davis account for approximately 3,000 more residentsThat means 20,000 more cars in the Yonge/Davis corridorAnd this does not include infill developments, six of which are in ward 5
  • Proposal is vague – seemingly on purposeEntire parcels of land which surrounds Glenway Circle offer no details and could be spun off to 3rd partyNo details provided on private roads or gated accessPoor traffic studies (we have all lived here for 20 years and know congestion times and areas)Where is elementary school going to be located (adjacent to GO Station or east side of Eagle could be appropriate) We are also finding that there is manipulating interaction and consultation with residentsDivide and conquer approach with residentsThey have not met with most of the residents that back onto the front 12 holes of the golf courseThere has been suggestions of individual offers to residents to get their buy in.There is currently no commitment to building a golf course. As stated by the Developer’s communications representative, this hinges solely on Phase 1 being approved.It seems obvious based on the Developer’s actions that they are only going through the motions and relying on positive OMB hearing decision!We have also seen and experienced how other developers in this town have met face to face with residents to hear and address their concerns and not through a representative.
  • Glenway is an award winning community – it is deliberately built as a award winning golf course community.The Golf course offered an unique designed irrigation /storm water system to satisfy Town’s mandate for zero water useThe Glenway neighbourhood was purposely planned around this gateway to the Town of Newmarket as a flowing network of quiet streets, large lots, detached single family homes, and picturesque views
  • So in summary, Growth inside of this stable neighborhood is unnecessary AND not required in order for us to meet the Places to Grow Act requirementsThe Glenway development is contrary to the Official PlanThe open green space of this community will serve as a recreational area for the 10,000 new residents planned for this part of townAnd Newmarket is already underserved in per capita greenspaceAnd finally, the rationale for this proposal is deeply flawed.So once again Mayor Van Bynen and Councillors, we thank you for the opportunity to speak this evening.

Transcript

  • 1. GPA Statutory Public MeetingJanuary 7th 2013
  • 2. don’t deserve this!!We used to have this!
  • 3. Agenda Who is the Glenway Preservation Association The Proposal Why it should not be accepted
  • 4. Agenda Who we are The Proposal Why it should not be accepted
  • 5. Who We Are The Glenway Preservation Association is incorporated and is the only registered association with the town of Newmarket. We have over 50 active volunteers and a petition of 1,500 signatures from residents opposing the development proposal. Through our regular communication we reach 700 households and had more than 300 residents at our recent public meeting in November.
  • 6. Mission Statement “To preserve and protect the existing open green- space and neighbourhood values associated with the Glenway community”
  • 7. The values we want to protect Protecting the green space that has been, and remains, a key objective within the Town’s Official Plan Preserving quality of lifestyle that brought us to Glenway - and to Newmarket Protecting the investment in our homes Safeguard the neighbourhood environment Prevent negative impact to the quality and cost of existing and planned infrastructure that this proposal would bring about
  • 8. Agenda Who we are The Proposal Why it should not be accepted
  • 9. The Proposal Put a picture of the proposal here?October 24, 2011 9
  • 10. Residents’ view of the Proposal!! Put a picture of the proposal here?October 24, 2011 10
  • 11. Agenda Who we are The Proposal Why it should not be accepted
  • 12. Why it should not be acceptedWe are not here tonight to talk about: how many houses should be built how tall should the condos be how tall the fencing and berms should be and where the trees should be replanted what the obvious negative traffic impacts will be
  • 13. Why it should not be acceptedWe are not here tonight to talk about: unavoidable issues with storm water management limited sewage allocation significant disruption to a stable, planned neighbourhood strain on existing infrastructure and resources increased TAXES on all Newmarket residents sufficient schooling enrolment
  • 14. Why it should not be acceptedSo here’s what we are going to talk about: The rationale for this proposal is highly questionable The real objectives of the Places to Grow Act There is more than enough development to meet future growth targets The Developers approach in our community Glenway was green before green was a colour
  • 15. A Highly Questionable Rationale Contrary to Official Plan Not located within Secondary Growth Plan area Does not adequately incorporate the planned growth in this area Eliminates valuable green space for current and future residents’ use Unrealistic assessment of infrastructure ‘stress’
  • 16. The objective of the Places to Grow Act We support the Town’s plan to preserve our green space & our stable, long-standing community Objective is NOT to dictate HOW the Towns grow, but to provide guidance & targets According to the Developer, their proposal “helps fulfill the direction of the Growth Plan. It provides for significant growth within part of the existing built-up area of Newmarket. It will assist in meeting the Provincial targets for intensification” WE DON’T NEED THIS KIND OF ASSISTANCE!!
  • 17. More than enough Development Town to grow from 85,000 Properties zoned to 98,000 by 2026 residential that follow OP: Properties in the North  McGregor Farm (Davis West and South East and Bathurst) account for approximately  Toth Farm (west of the 7,000 more residents Upper Canada Mall) Properties on Yonge and  Slessor Square Davis account for approximately 3,000 more  Davis and George residents  Yonge and Millard
  • 18. The Developers and their approach Proposal is vague Manipulating interaction and consultation with residents No commitment to golf course. Hinges on Phase 1 approval Relying on positive OMB hearing decision
  • 19. Glenway was green before green was a colour
  • 20. In Summary The rationale for this proposal is deeply flawed Growth inside of this stable neighborhood is unnecessary AND not required in order for us to meet the Places to Grow Act requirements Glenway development is contrary to the Official Plan The open green space of this community will serve as a recreational area for the 10,000 new residents planned for this part of town