CCRA PRESIDENT Bob Baron: March 2002 Last month I wrote that there have been a number of zoning by-law amendments applied for in our area and that where these were not in the best interest of the community, the CCRA would oppose them. Since then, the number has increased. The city looks at properties in our area and says that a forty-five or fifty foot property is a big property regardless of the fact that the surrounding properties are fifty or sixty feet or more, respectively. If we do not act to preserve our neighbourhood, the City's bureaucracy will allow it to completely change in character, simply because the changes requested seem OK. When 45 feet becomes acceptable, the next step is for those who would like to turn a quick profit and move on, to request variances for 40 feet or less. Is this why we bought homes in this area - to watch the rich green-space disappear? I don't think so! If you want our community to survive, you will have to let the city planners know that. Attend the community meetings where these variances are to be discussed. Let the CCRA know when public notice is given of application for a by-law variance (we don't get notification of these, automatically), and above all, decide what type of neighbourhood you want to live in. If you want the Centennial Community to remain what it is, be prepared to fight for it. NOTICE: We've scheduled a meeting to discuss a zoning by-law variance application for 54 D'Arcy Magee Crescent. If you have an interest or will be affected by this variance, please come to this meeting at the Port Union Community Centre on Monday, March 11th at 7:30 pm. By the time you are reading this (in the Newsletter), the first public meeting re the widening of Port Union Road, north of Lawrence to Sheppard Avenue should have taken place. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Under the guise of widening Port Union, the City appears to be looking at ways to force out-of-area traffic through our community at the expense of its destruction. If you received the same flier as I did, it informs us the City is assessing 8 alternatives that "best address the existing and future transportation demands in the Port Union Road area". I know that the GO Train crowd can be a pain when they are leaving or arriving but other than those situations, what transportation demands do we have that couldn't be addressed by some additional bus service? There is no logical benefit to extending Centennial Road or Meadowvale Road across Highway 2A. There is no good enough reason to destroy the Rouge Valley by extending Lawrence out to Pickering. The so-called benefit would be that out-of-area motorists would more quickly get to the bottlenecks at Lawrence and Morningside and Lawrence and Kingston Road where they could wait longer before heading further into the City. From our informal survey, people coming into this area or leaving this area feel that street access is adequate. So, where's the benefit to our community? It appears that there is only cost. Am I missing something here? We have just received notification that the physical audit of the Manson Plant and properties is about to commence. This has to happen before we can find out if the lands have finally been properly remediated. This is also necessary before any work can commence on the portion of the Village Common which was formerly part of the Manson Lands. An interesting tidbit: Mr. Sheldon Libfeld has been elected to the position of President of the Greater Toronto Home Builders' Association. You probably know him better as the head of Yellow Moon. Hopefully, in his new capacity, he will be inclined to ensure that the Yellow Moon development will be a positive addition to our community instead of the cause for concern it has been up to now. Along with PUVHA and West Rouge CA, we have written to Mr. Robert Fung and the other members of the board of the Waterfront Development Corporation, to encourage them to approve the release of funds to get the Port Union Waterfront development underway. Last month I informed you that the pedophile who had been living in our area, had left. Unfortunately, the information I received from our MPP's office was inaccurate and this unwanted resident was not only living here but working here. He is once again in the news and being sought under a Canada-wide warrant for violating the terms of his parole. Last week, he allegedly was unsupervised in the company of a child. When he was informed the Police were being called, he fled. This is exactly the type of situation we all fear will happen when these types of sex-offenders are released back into society. If you are concerned about this situation, let our MP, Mr. John McKay, and our MPP, Mr. Steve Gilchrist, know. Both of these gentlemen can exert pressure on their respective parties to get adequate legislation in place to protect our children. You might be interested to know that last year, the Toronto Police Services Board and Toronto Police Chief, Julian Fantino, wrote to the Federal Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada and the Attorney General of Ontario, with recommendations with respect to the release of high-risk offenders (pedophiles). The recommendations dealt with increasing the level and duration of monitoring of these convicted offenders once they were released back into society and making treatment/counselling part of their release. The response of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada was to not support any of the recommendations, on the basis that once the offender was released, he was no longer an individual charged with an offence and his individual rights would be violated by these recommended measures. In December, the provincial Attorney General responded that he would be pleased to meet to discuss the issues. The letters from Chief Fantino and the Police Services Board, were sent in May and June of last year. The Brumwell Street rezoning application will be going before the OMB, probably sometime in March. We are opposed to this development for a number of reasons and have asked for support from the City on this through Councillor Moeser. I've just been informed that the Sutcliffe Group are trying to buy the back yards of the residents of the south end of Brumwell on the west side in order to extend the development south to Lawson. We will keep you informed of developments. You may have been reading about the Emergency Shelter By-law, recently. This is a necessary piece of legislation. We have homeless people, battered women, families with no place to go and others who need the protection that this legislation intends. You are all aware that in our area, we have a number of shelters to protect these people. The City wants to pass "As of Right" legislation to deal with the determination of where these shelters should go. This is not a good idea. In fact, it takes away any community's ability to participate in the decision process as to where and what type of shelter is to be established and makes it unnecessary for there to be a checking process that ensures adequate safety and facilities are part of the decision. We have been fighting for the City to establish a task force to develop responsible legislation but there are a number of Councillors who are trying to push the "As of Right" By-law through. We have been working with Councillor Moeser to try to influence other Councillors to not rush into passing legislation which will not do the job. The draft by-law contains no guidelines nor limits and is the sort of legislation that would allow the worst sort of decisions to be made. We've seen how this works in the past with some of the terrible errors in judgement the City exercised in the development of the Manson lands. We cannot let new legislation come in that virtually guarantees that type of mistake will happen again.