CCRA PRESIDENT Bob Baron: December 2001 On October 25th, we had our Annual General Meeting (AGM). Reports were presented regarding the overall health and activities of the CCRA over the last year. Fiscal reports were presented and copies were available to attendees. A presentation was made by Crime Concern (Lori Metcalfe and P.C. Rick Richardson of 42 Division, Crime Prevention Office) about making your home, car and neighbourhood safe. It was an excellent presentation and there were also helpful hand-outs. Councillor Moeser spoke about some issues including the environmental assessment being carried out re the widening of Port Union Road. Thank you to all the presenters. We normally have our annual elections at the AGM but we did not have the required quorum of 30 residents. This put us in an awkward position because our Treasurer and the Planning Chair are becoming vacant and we were unable to elect replacements. After a number of years as our Treasurer, Mike Osborn has become a very wealthy man and is retiring to an island he bought in the South Pacific - just kidding. Mike has given us a number of dedicated years as Treasurer and for a time, our Planning Chair and has decided it's time to pass the torch. Liz Bowers has been our most recent Planning Chair and has worked tirelessly to protect our area from such dangers as the asbestos problems on the Manson site and to ensure the best interests of the area were being served during the development of Port Union Village. The breadth and depth of her knowledge and understanding as well as her sense of justice are going to be sorely missed. These two individuals leave behind enormous shoes to fill. We need several people from the area to step forward to fill these posts and a couple of others that have been vacant this past year. As I said earlier, we had less than thirty residents attend the AGM and I found this surprising. This year we had the greatest number of CCRA memberships paid in the history of the CCRA. I can only surmise that you feel we are doing a good job and that there are not a lot of burning issues. If I am wrong in my assessment, please let me know. On October 30th, we had our latest Public Review Committee (PRC) Meeting re the Manson Decommissioning Project. For those of you who do not know, the PRC is a committee comprised of representatives of the City Planning Department, the Department of Health, the City Peer Reviewer, the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of Labour, Councillor Moeser, the consultant representing Yellow Moon - Candec and representatives from the 3 area community associations (CCRA, PUVHA and WRCA). These meetings have been going on for almost two years to monitor the decommissioning of the Manson Plant. There are still some issues to be resolved and of course the most important issue of whether or not the Yellow Moon lands have been properly cleared of asbestos. The MOE is in the process of performing a site audit which resulted from the efforts of the PRC at the insistence of the community associations. It will be late December before the audit is complete and an assessment done of the results. If the site is not clear, then this watchdog committee must continue. However, the city says it does not have the funds to continue beyond another meeting. I find this difficult to accept given the importance of the issue here and I think that if it is necessary to continue these meetings, we as a community will have to let the city know it is imperative that it finds the required funding somehow. This is the only way that this community can reasonably expect its interests to be looked after. Steve Gilchrist has offered to host the meetings but the real issue is payment of the City Peer Reviewer (an independent engineer who monitors the process and evaluates whether approved procedures are being followed). If the Province offers to pay for the Peer Reviewer, it is a noble gesture but as we are trying to ensure that the MOE is performing its function properly, there is a conflict of interest here. We will advise you if we need widespread support to continue this necessary process. On November 5th, there was a public forum on the new Part II Plan for the City of Toronto's Central Waterfront. This was the first of 4 such forums for the City to present its concept and four core principles to "transform the 10-kilometre area between Dowling Avenue and Coxwell Avenue into one of the great waterfronts of the world. Once approved by Toronto City Council, the Plan will provide the legal framework to guide land use activities in the Central Waterfront". Even discounting the political rhetoric, the plan is magnificent. It inspires excitement and imagination and shows that people with vision are involved in this project. It also provides a compelling reason for ensuring the development of the Port Union Waterfront goes ahead as planned. The Port Union access will be one of the conduits which will encourage people to come to the Central Waterfront and as such should be one of the first areas of development - not tacked on as an afterthought. The Waterfront Corporation would like all development to wait until the downtown waterfront plan is finalised but as it will necessarily be different than the waterfront developments to be expected away from the downtown core, there is no reason to delay the Port Union Waterfront. We have been working on this plan for years. The Environmental Assessment has been done and the development is planned and approved. It is also funded and only the formal go-ahead is required. As this is a joint project by the federal, provincial and municipal governments, it is crucial that you let all your elected representatives know that you want the Port Union Waterfront development to go ahead without delay. There is something very disturbing that was reported to us last week. There is a piece of public property that was being used as a park by the residents in the Holmcrest Trail area. The city, without any community consultation has deemed the land surplus and sold it for development. It is always upsetting to the community to lose parkland or greenbelt but to have these public properties taken out of use with no community consultation, seems a bit totalitarian. Our elected representatives are supposed to be aware of and communicate the wants and concerns of the communities they represent, to the City. On the information I have seen so far, it does not appear that Councillor Moeser has done that. You might want to read the letter to the editor concerning this issue. There is a new subdivision development for which a rezoning application has been filed to permit 19 residential lots off Brumwell Street. We will review application and assess its impact on the community. We will keep you posted. Remember that 2001 is the International Year of the Volunteer. You still have time to join the executive of the CCRA.