Archive for April, 2016

  
Reminder post.

Junction 
Residents Association Community Clean-up Day on Sun., Apr. 24.
gloves and bags at the Green P parking lot on Pacific Ave. 
starting at 10 am on Sun., Apr. 24. 
The JRA will organize pick-up by Sanitation Green P parking lot on Pacific Ave any time between 10 am and 4 pm on Sunday.

Link to their full response here

The blog has highlighed main facts, with bold text and underlining.

All text city document.

Executive Summary
The provincial government and municipalities in Ontario both play significant roles in the licensed child care system. They share the belief that high quality, accessible child care is essential for parents to participate in the workplace; generates positive child outcomes; and is a key tenet of poverty reduction.
To develop this response, Toronto Children’s Services and Parks, Forestry & Recreation conducted broad consultation with service providers, parents and others. Consultations were held with District Child Care Advisory Committees, Children’s Services staff, and the Toronto Child and Family Network and its committees, including early learning and care, family support, early identification and intervention, Aboriginal, and French-language. A parent survey also collected 9,291 responses, in both English and French, from parents both using and not using licensed child care. In addition, Parks, Forestry & Recreation and its stakeholders have informed the sections in this response related to recreation programs.
The proposed changes in the provincial consultation document continue the important work that the Province has taken to modernize the legislative and regulatory framework governing child care in Ontario. The City of Toronto continues to support the need for modernization and appreciates the opportunity to comment on these proposals. Many of the proposed changes are important and necessary, especially those that provide flexibility for operators, recognize the importance of Registered Early Childhood Educators (RECEs), strengthen the role of the service system manager, and improve access and quality of programming for children and families.
The proposed changes to licensing standards are of concern. If adopted, they could result in increased costs and service loss. The impact on the availability of spaces is a result of changes to age ranges, group sizes, ratios and the additional space requirements for sleeping areas. In Toronto, the anticipated total loss is up to 2,184 infant and toddler spaces – not including any operator decisions to close rooms because they are no longer viable. The proposed changes would increase parent fees by an estimated 20.8 per cent and 39.2 per cent for infants and toddlers respectively. While provisions have been made for a transitional implementation period, this will not mitigate the estimated loss. Parents have strongly expressed their concern with the lack of access to and affordability of the current child care system. These proposed changes will only exacerbate the difficulty of securing a licensed child care space.
The licensed child care system in Toronto consists of 65,000 spaces, of which 40 per cent are available to families who need fee assistance. While the Province cites one-year federal parental leave benefits as a rationale for changes to the infant age groupings, many families can not take advantage of these benefits (for example, students and low-income earners). It is often these families who benefit most from accessible, affordable, high-quality child care. Our joint responsibility is to level the playing field so that all families have the supports they need for employment and healthy child development. The proposed regulatory changes will work against increasing access for those families who need it most.
It is recommended that the Province maintain the current age ranges and ratios and proceed with implementing enhancements such as increasing the number of trained staff and lowering toddler group sizes. The City of Toronto currently only funds the construction of spaces for 10 toddlers. Setting this maximum group size in regulation – while grandparenting existing programs licensed for 15 toddlers – is a more cost effective change than what has been proposed as it does not create additional capital requirements.
The proposals also put at risk many longstanding community-based recreation programs that provide quality, affordable, programs. These programs promote the overall health and wellbeing of children not

participating in licensed child care but may no longer be accessible depending on how they are classified under any regulatory changes.
As a sector, the early learning and care and recreation communities must work together to find regulatory solutions that improve quality and access without wholesale changes that have unintended consequences. The City of Toronto will continue to work with the Province as progress is made towards this vision.
Recommendation 1: That the Province implement changes on which the City has been previously consulted and has expressed its support in this response, including changes that directly improve quality, such as requiring additional qualified staff in infant, toddler and preschool rooms; that the Province not make changes in areas not previously consulted on; especially, that current ratios and group sizes be maintained; and that future proposals be further developed through engagement with the child care and recreation.

4:08 pm I was just told 

4/20 –is  the annual day of celebration for cannabis culture lovers, 

which takes on special significance in Canada this year, as Canada will Intro law on spring of 2017.
2:55 pm Apr 20th 2015

This is the biggest number of people I have seen at the square. In my having viewed most of them in the past year.

police all in one area in the SE corner

The Junction unlike The Bloor West Village, The Junction Triangle
What is section 37,

Here is a description given by Edward Keenan in one of his Toronto Star, columns, he explains it well

What is Section 37 and why does it exist?

Essentially, Section 37 of the planning act is the one that allows for what other cities call “community benefits agreements.” If the owner of a property wants to build something that does not comply with zoning regulations, the owner may voluntarily agree to provide community benefits in cash or amenities in exchange for approval.

These benefits are negotiated by city planning staff and with local councillors in the area where the development will be built. Though the agreements themselves are approved by city council, the use of the funds is largely controlled directly by the local councillor for use in projects inside his or her ward.

The purpose of the section in the act is to offset the problems caused by changes to a neighbourhood when different kinds of developments are added to it, such as to compensate for increased traffic, population, or changes to the streetscape new developments bring.

More: The peculiar uses of Section 37 — from public art to affordable housing

Click here to read the full article , ….the next section in the article explains the problems with  section 37.

The section 37 wording from the planning act. (Ontario)&

Increased density, etc., provision by-law

37. (1) The council of a local municipality may, in a by-law passed under section 34, authorize increases in the height and density of development otherwise permitted by the by-law that will be permitted in return for the provision of such facilities, services or matters as are set out in the by-law.

Agreements

(3) Where an owner of land elects to provide facilities, services or matters in return for an increase in the height or density of development, the municipality may require the owner to enter into one or more agreements with the municipality dealing with the facilities, services or matters.

Registration of agreement

(4) Any agreement entered into under subsection (3) may be registered against the land to which it applies and the municipality is entitled to enforce the provisions thereof against the owner and, subject to the provisions of the Registry Act and the Land Titles Act, any and all subsequent owners of the land. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, s. 37.

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2015/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-83196.pdf

If you are an artist looking to store your vehicle loaded  project stuff, and works during an install which will take days or a performance person or group with a lot of truck paked gear in Toronto , you are aware of how fraught it is leaving your be vehicle stirred kit in a safe and accessible place.

Parking on deep off the normal travelled streets in an industrial area is just a no no. In the Junctions the last good place was just closed down by the developer who is starting to prep the land for their build.

But there is one place yhT is really safe big and not going away. It’s close to Lakeshore Rd E. on Eastern Ave behind the Jockey clubs building g in their land. 

Always lit up and I the wide open.  

Hear are a few images if the facility.

The Junction retail strip is composed of many two story buildings and often with some form of ornamental facade treatment. At Keele St. and Dundas St. W. there are four monumental buildings on each corner. Even the magnificent Parkdale retail strip does not have such a corner.

Looking down Dundas St. W from Heinzmann Avenue, you can see the mighty historical history of the strip, Take a walk down to Pacific Ave. and a look at the building on the south east corner, You can see again the power of the Junctions past.

In the present on Dundas St W. on the south side just east of Keele St. there sits the old Sanders Furniture building, now wonderfully restored and used by the Channel Zero people.

Parkdale can claim longer and more diverse 2 and 3 story buildings but lacks monumental historic buildings. The Gladstone and Drake hotels are impressive historic buildings.

Having been photographing Toronto’s retail strips for the past few months an idea was steeping in my mind, Even today the section claimed by the Eglinton Ave Rail project near Bayview Ave., the idea solidified.

Here is an image taken today of the Bayview Ave. strip (Leaside). You can see the simple two story block buildings that make up this strip with very little ornamental facades, and no defining buildings.

The Junction is lucky and should remembered by the community members who protected the great buildings in the Junction.

….two local Community Environment Days this month:  Ward 13 on April 16 in the City Parking Lot at 2001 Lakeshore Blvd (east of Ellis), 10 am-2 pm, and Ward 14 at Sorauren Park (along Wabash Ave. south of Dundas St. W.), 10 am-2 pm.

Parking Regulation Amendment – Vine Avenue (Ward 13) adopted

 Traffic Concerns – Vine Avenue, McMurray Avenue and Pacific Avenue (Ward 13) Amended 
Speed Limit Review- Annette Street (Ward 13) Amended

Left-Turn Prohibition – Runnymede Road at Maria Street (Ward 13) Amended
Clink links to city file for each roadway change.

 
Junction Residents Association Community Clean-up Day on Sun., Apr. 24.

gloves and bags at the Green P parking lot on Pacific Ave. 

starting at 10 am on Sun., Apr. 24. 

The JRA will organize pick-up by Sanitation Green P parking lot on Pacific Ave any time between 10 am and 4 pm on Sunday.

All txt the city, 

Committee:

1. Requested the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture to report to its November 28, 2016 meeting: 

a. In consultation with the appropriate parties, on an inventory of cycling tourism products in Toronto and identify what packages and products would help increase the economic impact of cycling tourism; and

b. On a plan to better package, and promote cycle-based tourism opportunities in Toronto.

Origin

(April 11, 2016) Letter from Councillor Mary Fragedakis, Ward 29, Toronto – Danforth

Summary

Toronto attracts over 14 million overnight and 26.5 million same day visitors each year who together contribute over $7 Billion into the local economy. 

In addition to tourists, local residents, over half of whom were born outside of Toronto, are both an economic driver for and beneficiary of the Toronto tourism economy.

Globally, cycling tourism is an enormous economic driver. The economic value of cycle tourism trips in Europe is €44 billion per annum (approx. CDN $65 billion) while US cycling tourists spend USD $46.9 billion annually. In 2011, 12 percent (1.6 million) Canadian visitors (including Ontario visitors) participated in cycling activities while travelling in Ontario. These visitors spent an average of $198 per person for a total of $317 million.

Cycling tourists spend more and stay longer, with higher than average incomes and education and all-round attractive demographics. Cycle tourists include visitors who make cycling part of their visit (e.g. renting bikes) and visitors for whom cycling is the primary activity of their visit (eg. arriving and departing on bikes).

Municipalities and tourism organizations across Ontario are prioritizing projects that feed the growing visor demand for cycle tourism at destinations of their choice. Toronto has a dynamic cycling community with assets including cycle-based tour operators, rental facilities and numerous cycling events including the largest in the province, Ride for Heart with over 13,000 cyclists and $8 million in annual economic impact. (http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-56371.pdf)

In 2015, the City of Toronto invested approximately $8 million in cycling infrastructure. Toronto’s current cycling network is over 855 kilometres and growing. This investment, along with Bike Share Toronto, other transportation options and location all provide Toronto with a unique opportunity to become a hub for cycling activities. Toronto is also home to 56 kilometres of the 1,800 long Great Lakes Waterfront Trail. By better promoting and informing cycling options, Toronto can leverage infrastructural investments to the benefit of visitor spending, residential enjoyment and healthy, active urban exploration and economic activity.

Background Information

(April 11, 2016) Letter from Councillor Mary Fragedakis on Promoting Cycling Tourism in Toronto 

(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2016/ed/bgrd/backgroundfile-92021.pdf)

Motions

Motion to Add New Business at Committee moved by Councillor Mary Fragedakis (Carried)
Motion to Adopt Item moved by Councillor Mary Fragedakis (Carried)

Posting flyers on a bench is very effective I have been told, more so that poles and is common in Califorina. This benches at Chapman University.

But the posting flyers around the Junction has been fraught over the years with difficulties.  A individual who owned a lot of buildings on the Dundas W. strip who  systematically go down the street and remove flyers off every pull for many years. There still is a shop owner who really just likes flyers and take them down. 

There also residents to take down flyers they just don’t like.

Yet flyers could be a very effective way of notifying large groups people about something happening in the community. 

Just a comment upon seeing this bench.