Follow on
OSHAWA ROSEMARY
  • Home
  • BLOG
  • About Me
  • Contact

Urgent Need to Address Oshawa's Drug Problem

3/5/2021

0 Comments

 
 On the Agenda for this Monday's Development Services Committee Meeting there is a request from the Mayor's newly appointed Community Safety Task Force for funding SECURITY & SAFETY FEATURES TO PROMOTE CRIME PREVENTION IN THE DOWNTOWN. Imo, there may be unintended consequences.

The request is to amend the Downtown Community Improvement Plan (CIP) and provide funds for security 'features' to promote crime prevention 'through environmental design principles'.  It may sound lofty...but look at what this involves:

1. Out of the gate the request will likely be supported by 3 of the 6 members of the Development Services Committee (DSC) as the two Chairs of the two Mayor's Task Forces plus the Mayor are voting members of DSC.... knowing this, who would be leaning toward a NO vote and why would anyone consider voting NO because promoting safety and crime prevention is a good thing right???   Well, actually maybe me.

2. Obviously store front businesses may want to install gates and bars and extra lights and security cameras. The fact is a number already have. But what about other commercial areas of the City where break ins and criminal activities are happening? The City's CIP funds only apply to a specific area in the downtown....what about those businesses outside, even across the street from the CIP boundaries, like south of John St. or north of Brock St....or Simcoe St. north around Beatrice where there are currently many problems. Home owners choose to pay and install their own security cameras for their security.

3. The Mayor's Task Force's Chair Bob Chapman is asking to have the set up for the City's CIP changed and allow the property owner/city 50-50% funding  to include these gates, bars, security lights and cameras.

Imo this request is problematic when you focus on what the Downtown Community Improvement Plan (CIP) funds were set up for and dedicated to: FACADE & ACCESSIBILTY IMPROVEMENT.

The new 'features' are not FACADE improvements and not only do they take money away from the building revitalization purpose of the CIP, they take money from making the Downtown more accessible to those who have mobility issues, who can't get in to shop or work in over 50% of the downtown properties because the premises have no ramps or automatic door openers.

The Oshawa Accessibility Advisory Committee has tried to improve accessibility in the past two years in the downtown. However Council has turned down three motions that would have helped promote automatic door openers and removing barriers to access. It was made clear to those who asked for ways to improve the downtown accessibility that the City COULD NOT OR WOULD NOT INCREASE THE DOWNTOWN CIP FUNDING.

4. The crime/drug problems in the Downtown have worsened to the point where something immediately must be done. The question is whether this proposal is another wasted effort like the Welcoming Street project when the City's DRUG PROBLEM, the root cause of the crime, security and safety problems. Why is the task force not starting with the DRUG PROBLEM?  

Although the Minutes of the first two meetings of  the Mayor's Community Safety Task Force (January  29, 2021 and February  26, 2021 (see links below) give good indication that there is much positive discussion and many well intentioned efforts being initiated, ADDRESSING THE DRUG PROBLEM IS MISSING. 

Hopefully at the third meeting later this month it could be top of this Mayor's Task Force Agenda...and maybe they could have Oshawa Fire Services represented because with DRPS and Fire Services and Oshawa Municipal By-law and the support of concerned residents and businesses a strong action plan to crack down on the drug houses in Oshawa will take shape.

https://www.oshawa.ca/residents/resources/MayorsTaskForceCSSWB-Meeting-Minutes_Jan29_21.pdf

www.oshawa.ca/residents/resources/MayorsTaskForceCSSWB-Meeting-Minutes_Feb26_21.pdf 

There have been 3 murders downtown Oshawa in the past year. They were not about homelessness. They were about drugs. The thefts are to pay for drugs. There are drug houses and meth labs across the city. The public needs to be involved and anonymously report drug houses. and the police and fire department need to vigorously follow up and bust them.

The costs of the City's contracted security service at City facilities went from $500K to over $1 Million in Oshawa Council's first budget following the 2018 election. But since then security incidents related to drugs and addiction at City facilities have more than doubled and continue to escalate. (See chart attached for breakdown of security incidents at City facilities.) Unfortunately, this seems a lesson that money spent on security features like patrols and cameras have not had an impact on Oshawa's drug problem.
​
Anyone suspecting drug manufacturing or sales in their neighbourhood must report this without fearing consequences. Anonymous calls can be made to Crime Stoppers https://durhamregionalcrimestoppers.ca/
​

Note: Durham Regional Crime Stoppers will pay up to $2000 for any information that leads to an arrest Call 1-800-222-TIPS (8477)


Picture
0 Comments

Council Gives The Robert McLaughlin House at 195 Simcoe St Reprieve From Demolition!

2/23/2021

0 Comments

 
​Another update from yesterday's Council meeting. Concerning the Robert McLaughlin House and the owner's demolition request: Council unanimously voted to refer the matter to the City's heritage advisory committee Heritage Oshawa.

Heritage Oshawa has a virtual meeting this Thursday at 6:30 p.m. Any recommendation Heritage Oshawa makes will go to the Development Services Committee meeting Monday March 8th 1:30 p.m. (Which is full circle because that is where the owner's letter about demolishing the house was discussed Feb 8th.)

It seems members of Council are listening to the voice the community about preservation and adaptive reuse of the City's heritage assets. The Save The Robert McLaughlin House from Demolition petition started Feb 13 is nearing 5,000 signatures in less than 10 days.

Then the recommendation will go to Council March 29th where a decision will ultimately be made.

I think the concern, expressed by both delegations who spoke to Council yesterday is that, with the continued snow and rain expected in the next month, the hole in the roof should be sealed. It seems if the owner is unwilling, the City could do the work and put a lien on the property to recover costs further to Sections 445 and 446 of the Ontario Municipal Act.

​Work order
445 (1) If a municipality is satisfied that a contravention of a by-law of the municipality passed under this Act has occurred, the municipality may make an order requiring the person who contravened the by-law or who caused or permitted the contravention or the owner or occupier of the land on which the contravention occurred to do work to correct the contravention. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 184; 2009, c. 33, Sched. 21, s. 6 (38).
(2) An order under subsection (1) shall set out,
(a) reasonable particulars of the contravention adequate to identify the contravention and the location of the land on which the contravention occurred; and
(b) the work to be done and the date by which the work must be done. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 184

Remedial action
446 (1) If a municipality has the authority under this or any other Act or under a by-law under this or any other Act to direct or require a person to do a matter or thing, the municipality may also provide that, in default of it being done by the person directed or required to do it, the matter or thing shall be done at the person’s expense. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 184.
Entry upon land
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the municipality may enter upon land at any reasonable time. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 184.
Recovery of costs
(3)
The municipality may recover the costs of doing a matter or thing under subsection (1) from the person directed or required to do it by action or by adding the costs to the tax roll and collecting them in the same manner as property taxes. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 184.
Picture
Below is a letter to Oshawa City Council worth sharing, from a 5th generation descendant of Robert McLaughlin about the state of his former house at 195 Simcoe St. N. & the lack of preservation of Oshawa's history. The letter included a picture of Robert McLaughlin painting in his home.

"I am writing today to voice my concern regarding the state of the Robert McLaughlin house and to relay my utmost disdain at the lack of preservation of Oshawa's most treasured history.

As you are well aware , this house is steeped in history. To have it demolished would be a travesty to one of Oshawa's most treasured assets.

I was born and raised in Oshawa. 5th generation. My great great Grandfather was Robert McLaughlin. I am proud of my heritage. However, I am at a loss for words when it comes to the lack of preservation of Oshawa's history on the part of the politicians in Oshawa. I am sure you are all aware that the foundation of Oshawa was built on the hard work and sweat of Robert McLaughlin. If not for the McLaughlin Carriage Company, General Motors would have looked the other way when setting up operations. The McLaughlin Carriage Company had expanded dealerships across Canada which appealed to the expansion of General Motors . Roberts sons, George and Sam were able to negotiate to have General Motors reside in Oshawa due to their fathers successful carriage business.

​As a descendant of Robert I implore you to seriously consider preserving this vital piece of Oshawa’s history as we all know that once it is gone, it will forever be forgotten. Progress should never replace history. Thank you for your time . 
Regards, Susan

Picture
Below is another wonderful letter to Oshawa Council added to yesterday's meeting FROM THE GREAT, GREAT, GRANDDAUGHTER OF ROBERT MCLAUGHLIN

The Robert McLaughlin House Proposed Demolition
 
There are always planned alternatives to demolishing historic buildings, whatever size.
Houses of those whose contribution to our towns, cities or country were of significance should at all costs be preserved when those costs are feasible. The home of my great-
great grandfather, the Robert McLaughlin House on Simcoe Street, falls into the category of the “Need to Preserve”. The house when restored could serve any number of community needs - hospice, palliative care, etc. while preserving Robert McLaughlin’s name. Today we are too often at risk of throwing away too many monuments of the past: without our
past where is our future sense of identity?
 
Jocelyn Shaw




0 Comments

INFO · Hydro Return to Standard Rate Choice · DRPS Board Survey · Library Tax Clinic

2/23/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture

OSHAWA POWER
​www.opuc.on.ca/custo




DRPS
www.oshawa.ca/Modules/News/index.aspx?keyword=drps&newsId=d66d2889-ae09-442d-84a9-ab44ca89fa2e




OSHAWA LIBRARIES
oshawalibrary.on.ca/library-tax-clinics?fbclid=IwAR1rbCMPYMfxPXeSzvRkpBVKHye8t-ebY0Xfeb6C4iRC0Mi4gM6gofY2QXk



0 Comments

Application for Downtown TV Advertisement Signs Denied by 6-5 Close Vote

2/23/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture

The downtown building owner's request to install 2 TV advertisement signs on a wall of the Legends of Fazio building at the north east corner of Athol and Simcoe St was TURNED DOWN by a close 6-5  vote at the Feb 22, 2021 Council meeting.

Voting NO to the TV signs Bob Chapman, Derek Giberson, Jane Hurst, Tito-Dante Marimpietri, Brad Marks, Brian Nicholson; Voting Yes to the signs: John Gray, Rick Kerr, Rosemary McConkey, John Neal, Mayor Dan Carter.

The owner of the building made a delegation at the beginning of the meeting, indicating he has 11 tenant businesses in the downtown that are interested in advertising on the screens.



​​I had hoped to ask during the Q&A session after his 5 minute delegation if he was amenable to a compromise of 1 instead of 2 screens. A compromise might be the approach considering when this matter was before Committee Feb 8th the vote was split 3 to 3. However, as Mayor Carter includes the time the delegation takes to answer a Councillor's questions in the 5 minutes Councillors are allowed to ask questions, the Mayor ended my questions before I could ask this question.

It would good if there is another opportunity in the near future to investigate this matter further, as in my opinion,  the public and downtown businesses would benefit from a screen that increases awareness of activities and services in the downtown core.

0 Comments

Council Votes Not to Relocate the Long-Planned Community Park!

2/22/2021

0 Comments

 
HAPPY UPDATE about the February 22, 2021 Council meeting.
Council QUASHED Minto's proposal to relocate the KEDRON PART II PLAN COMMUNITY PARK!
Since Sept 30 2019, time and time again only, Councillors Neal, Jane Hurst and I were repeatedly saying NO do not relocate it. 
Finally today, with the final vote on this matter we had a majority...a Big Thank You goes out to Councillors Derek Giberson, John Gray and Brian Nicholson for seeing and saying it clearly, that staying the course was the most realistic plan. They gave added to the base to lock-up the 6 votes needed for a majority of the 11 Council votes. Logical thinking prevailed, 

Sharing some stats to indicate how massive the Kedron Part 2 Development Plan will be! So of course it will need a Super-Sized Community Park IN THE COMMUNITY, NOT BY ITSELF WHERE PEDESTRIANS WOULD HAVE TO WALK ACROSS A BUSY ARTERIAL ROAD.

11 developers
11 plans of subdivision;
8 schools;
2 neighbourhood parks (4.5 acre size),
12 parkettes (1.5 acre size)
approaching 9,000 residential dwelling units with:
2,894 detached houses;
1,084 street townhouses;
100 semis;
112 back-to-back towns;
2,448 block towns;
2,098 apartments incl. stacked towns
22,507 commercial sq.ft.
AND A SUPER-SIZED COMMUNITY PARK WHERE IT SHOULD BE LOCATED!
The picture below taken last summer is looking west in the direction of the future Community Park site
Picture
Picture
Picture
0 Comments

Since the Pandemic the Size & Location of Parkland in the City is More Important than Ever

2/20/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture

I am very appreciative of those residents who will take the time to write City Council and voice their concerns when they find something as objectionable and expedient as this Community Park Bait and Switch.


Copied below is a letter from an Oshawa resident, clearly concerned and not afraid to speak up! :

"One of the quirks of the planning process in Ontario which gives me some room for pause is who really represents the interests of future residents. They cannot speak for themselves. In theory I guess that is the politicians who legislate the rules, municipal staff who implement them and the local politicians who oversee them. I believe it is important that existing residents also raise concerns given that they have lived in the municipality, lived through neighborhood development and have a pretty good idea of what makes a livable and successful community. So here I am.

What has caught my attention recently is the proposal to move the existing location of the Community Park in the Kedron II Plan. I was curious as to why it was being moved and after talking to both Ward I Councillors who represent this part of Oshawa I was more than a bit surprised to learn neither of them support moving the park. For me that raised some "red flags" and a number of questions. Would they not know what was best for their Ward?

In the last few weeks, I have spent a number of hours reading the Official Plan and talking to various people to try and understand Kedron II and why the park needed to move.

​I do not believe that it needs to move at least not yet. We simply do not have enough information yet to justify the move. What is the rush? The existing park site was deemed to be acceptable so why rush to move it without getting a few more answers. The conservative approach would be to wait to establish the need before making the decision.


Rushing to move the park will require an exemption from the Region to breach the urban/rural boundary and locate onto prime agricultural land. This may eventually be the future, but it does not need to happen now. It also raises the issue that residents, particularly children and seniors will have to cross an arterial road to get to the Community Park. If we leave the Park in its current location this risk is alleviated.
The Official Plan states in Section 2.6.2.5. “Community and neighbourhood parks shall generally be located as central as possible to their respective service areas and shall, wherever possible, be safely accessible to pedestrians and cyclists via active transportation facilities such as multi-use paths, walkways, sidewalks and bike paths, and be located in areas which do not require pedestrians to cross arterial roads in order to reach such parks. (OPA 179)

Kedron II is a high-density residential development the type of which North Oshawa has never seen before. There are estimated to be 8800 dwelling units with an estimated population in excess of 22,000. Access and safe access to a Community Park is going to be critical. I think we have already seen what happens when you gather a lot of people together during this unfortunate Pandemic. Concessions have already been made to meet the compact design of the Development with the Parkette size requirement being reduced and the lot size of proposed and hypothetical schools also being reduced. I believe, the DDSB rejected stacking schools more than three floors. The point I am making is this is a densely populated community that needs safe access to centralized park areas.

At the Development Services Committee meeting, I heard about getting a few more acres of park land in the move, but is the safety of our children and seniors who will have to cross the arterial road worth the benefit? What I did not hear discussed is what is the benefit to the Developers of moving the Park. Do we know what they will do with the thirty acres? If they want to build low density housing on the park land they would not need an amendment to the Official Plan as that is already allowed, so why is an amendment for “alternative residential land uses” being proposed. You do not need this for low density housing. What is it that we do not know? Are they looking at adding more high-density dwelling units? Will this trigger a further designation of parkland under the Planning Act? Is that why they are trying to give us a few more acres now? Is something else being developed for those lands? We simply do not know yet! I think we need an answer before moving the Community Park. We need to know why we are doing it and until we have more clarity it should not be done.

In summary, what do we know if we move the Community Park to the requested location? We have to ignore our own planning rules by locating onto prime agricultural land breeching the urban/rural boundary and we are subjecting our residents, particularly children and seniors, to the risk of crossing an arterial road road to get to the new location of the Community Park.

In summary, what do we not know? The reason we are taking on more risk for our residents by moving the Park? What are the future plans for land where the Park is currently located? What is the rush to make a decision to move the Park? Are we looking at more high-density dwelling units or something else in an already precedent setting high-density development? We do not know when the Community Park will be ready or any of the hypothetical schools and their athletic facilities will be available?"

I urge Council to work with the Ward 1 Councillors to alleviate their concerns, after all they represent this area, take a conservative approach to protecting the safety of our future residents and I hope you will take more time to seek further answers and clarity before making the decision to move the Community Park in Kedron II. Send this decision back to staff and Committee for further consideration. I believe I am pro-development, but I would like to see it done safely, responsibly, with clarity and all the information on the table.
​

0 Comments

Monday March 1st 2021 -  REOPENINGS IN OSHAWA

2/19/2021

0 Comments

 
MONDAY MARCH 1st is REOPENING DAY (albeit with certain stipulations) In addition to City Hall, the Civic Rec Centre, DelPark Homes Centre, Donevan and the South Oshawa Community Centre reopening for limited use by appointment only. For more details see here https://www.oshawa.ca/Modules/News/index.aspx...
Oshawa Public Libraries has some branches reopening March 1st too, with limited hours to include in-person visits for browsing library collections, computer appointments and printing services, and staff assistance.
Contactless Library Take-Out services will continue to be available.
oshlib.ca/take-out
The Northview and Delpark Branches will re-open on Monday, March 1. The Jess Hann Branch will re-open on Tuesday, March 2.
The McLaughlin Branch will continue to provide Library Take-Out and printing services during this time. External book return chutes are open at all branches


0 Comments

Petition Soars to 3,000+ signatures in 6 days to save historic Robert McLaughlin House!

2/18/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
Good article in Oshawa This Week about the Robert McLaughlin house at 195 Simcoe St. Oshawa.
The Petition  this morning is OVER 3,000 SIGNATURES, and that is in less than one week!


The article is copied here. Also, below is the list of the MANY PERMITTED USES under the property's zoning. Adaptive reuse is certainly an option for this large historic Oshawa house actually on a 1/2 acre property (including 201 Simcoe St. N., 12 and 16 Elgin St. E.)!
​








​"Heritage advocates call on Oshawa council to save McLaughlin family home from 'demolition by neglect'
Home at 195 Simcoe St. N. was heavily damaged by fire in 2019

An Oshawa home of significant heritage value is facing demolition after it suffered massive fire damage almost two years ago but local heritage advocates are fighting to preserve it.

The home, located at 195 Simcoe St. N., is associated with Robert McLaughlin who was the founder of the McLaughlin Carriage Company which later became General Motors Canada.

The home was built around 1887 in the Classical Revival Style and McLaughlin lived in it from 1901 to 1919 with his wife Eleanor. It was converted into office space in the 1960s, hosting doctors and dentists and before being left vacant.

McLaughlin is also a former mayor of Oshawa and the house was also home to another former mayor, RH James.

Warren Munro, development services commissioner for Oshawa, explained the city first received a request for a demolition permit from Nantucket Investments and property owners Sherland Chhangur in 2017.

Heritage Oshawa was opposed to the demolition and ordered a heritage research report before ultimately recommending that the property receive a heritage designation. Council opted to label it a “listed non-designated property” instead.

“If somebody files a notice of intent to demolish when it’s a listed non-designated property, council has 60 days to oppose the demolition permit and do a designation,” said Munro.

In February of 2019, Munro said the property owner went to the committee of adjustment and received approvals to redevelop the house into an apartment building but two months after that a massive fire significantly damaged the property.

A man suspected of a stabbing barricaded himself in the house and threatened to set it aflame. As police negotiated with him, the fire broke out. Firefighters had to wait until the man was apprehended by police to fight the fire.

At the time the house was officially vacant, but regularly used by squatters.

Munro said after the fire, the property -- which caused massive damage and left a large hole in the roof covered by a tarp -- was subject to property standards complaints and Chhangur was ordered to commission an engineer’s assessment on the site.

The city received the assessment in January 2020 and it stated that the house had excessive water damage as well as fire damage and it outlined two options: demolish or repair it with a recommendation to demolish.

“We reached out to (the owner) in April 2020 and said what is your intention? We kept following up in May and in May he got a property standards order that said we order you to do one of two things: demolish or repair,” explains Munro. “He hasn’t done it and it got referred to our legal team and it’s currently before the courts.”

This month, the city received a letter from Chhangur stating his intent to demolish the house.

Council will consider the issue on Feb. 22. If council doesn’t take any action, after 60 days the city can issue a demolition permit.

Local heritage advocate Jane Clark, who is a member of Heritage Oshawa but spoke on her own behalf, said she believes the home can still be saved and there are examples of homes in Durham that have been significantly damaged by fire that have been restored.

Cathy Clarke, a former Oshawa councillor and former chair of Heritage Oshawa, has created a Change.org petition called “Save the Robert McLaughlin House from Demolition by Neglect ”which has garnered over 1,800 signatures over the weekend.

Clark said a decision that allows the demolition of 195 Simcoe St. N. to move forward “affirms that demolition by neglect is an effective and welcome strategy for developers and owners of Oshawa’s heritage properties, and sets a dangerous precedent for the city’s remaining heritage resources.”
Here's a link to the Petition chng.it/NHZ7mZvb
​

Picture
0 Comments

Growing the Greenbelt public consultation launched today!

2/17/2021

0 Comments

 
This morning Ontario Municipal Affairs Minister Steve Clark made an announcement about GROWING THE GREENBELT.

He assured that the greenbelt expansion being undertaken starting today will not take away any of the current greenbelt designated lands, but will add to it. (Unfortunately it comes 10 years too late to protect the Columbus area 1,800 acres of prime agricultural land in Oshawa.)

"The Ontario government has launched a 60-day consultation to grow the Greenbelt and help protect more of the province's natural environment including farmlands, forests, wetlands and watersheds from future development. The consultations could result in the largest expansion of the greenbelt since its creation in 2005."

"This is truly a unique opportunity to grow the Greenbelt and protect Ontario's environmental, groundwater and agricultural resources for future generations," said Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. "The Premier has been steadfast in his commitment to protect the Greenbelt and our government will not consider any proposals to remove or develop any part of it."

The government is seeking public input on how best to grow the size and quality of the Greenbelt, including:
the Paris Galt Moraine; and
adding, expanding and further protecting urban river valleys, and increasing the Greenbelt's footprint into high density urban areas including the areas around the Don River in Toronto and land around Duffins Creek in Ajax and Pickering.

Here is a link to the map pictured behind Minister Clark on the left side https://prod-environmental-registry.s3.amazonaws.com/2021-02/Feb%2017%202021%20%E2%80%93%20URV%20Map%20FINAL.pdf​

Comments are welcome by email: greenbeltconsultation@ontario.ca or through the Environmental Registry of Ontario by April 19, 2021.
0 Comments

City Wide Parking Study Presentation

2/17/2021

0 Comments

 
Special Oshawa City Council meeting starting at 10 am this morning concerning the PARKING STUDY Below is the 18 slide PowerPoint from the consultant the IBI Group. The live Webstream link can be found here https://calendar.oshawa.ca/Meetings?StartDate=02/17/2021&EndDate=02/17/2021
0 Comments
<<Previous