Committee of the Whole (Public Hearing)
Tuesday November 26th, 2013 at 7 pm
Item 3. Official Plan Amendment, File OP.07.013
Liberty Development Corp,
Proposed development in the vicinity of Regional Road 7 and Keele Street
Deputation by Ms. Josephine Mastrodicasa of the Concord West Ratepayers Association:
Ms. Mastrodicasa starts by reading aloud comments submitted to her by Ms. Theresa Panezutti, member of the Concord West Ratepayers executive, regarding the “public park” inside the proposed Rose Garden City development:
Theresa Panezutti’s written submission:
“[The park is] proposed on the northwest corner of the property, adjacent to the railway track, and shown with a proposed roadway in the middle. Who plans a park with a roadway through it? Would this be safe for children playing? The concept that residents do not want lights from the park disturbing them is in fact a good reason. May I suggest the southeast corner of the property adjacent to the Don River lands? This will certainly not disturb the residents of the proposed development – after all, it’s beside the green space and [Highway] #7. It will have no impact on proposed residences since it will be surrounded by parklands, highways, commercial development and avoiding the residents altogether. By locating the park at the southeast corner, it will provide access to the existing local residents and the proposed residents on the north side and the south side of Highway #7 alike.”
So, basically, it’s to move the park. That’s it. Those are Theresa’s comments.
These [now] are my comments. Basically, I listen to everyone and I don’t think development is bad. I never thought development’s bad. However, development in a form that complements what’s existing is very important. Again, I heard people comment on quality of construction – we all know there’s good and bad quality of construction, however, I take offence [with the claim made by David Butterworth, the architect for Liberty Development, in response to the earlier deputation by Dr. Askanas] that the [myriad problems in Toronto caused by badly constructed condominiums happen because] City of Toronto doesn’t have good quality control [and the same problems would not happen in Vaughan]. I think that the accidents that they [the press articles quoted by Dr. Askanas] were referring to could happen anywhere. I’m not saying that it happens here or that it can’t happen again. So, obviously, I think those comments were taken out of context saying that Vaughan is special. I don’t think that Vaughan is special. It’s the same as everybody else, sorry.
My concern is still the same. It’s traffic. Traffic, traffic, traffic. This plan does not speak on this topic at all, it just adds congestion. I don’t care if you go phase 1, phase 2, phase 3, phase 4, phase 5 – let’s do it to exit on the north. Do it now. Do not allow traffic to go on Highway 7: you eliminate all these problems until we find a solution. If people are going to take this proposed Transitway, as I said before, these proposed transit users can use a walkway to Highway #7 to this proposed further transit hub, Metrolinx, whatever, which is going to be a bottleneck anyway. I, for one, believe that if you live in that corner, you use a car. I would love to be proven otherwise, but until that happens, they should not have 3 roads coming onto this corner [the stretch of Highway #7 at the south edge of the development, as is being proposed by Liberty]. You should not even have one. Any Councillor that would approve this idiotic plan – sorry, it is idiotic, because nobody puts 3 roads so close together at a bend beside a railway track that (if and when we decide who owns it) maybe we can expand, maybe we can enlarge, maybe we can stop the bottleneck, maybe, maybe. Until all those maybes are answered, and a solution provided, why would you entertain such a deal? Thank you.