Recap: Toronto Centre All Candidates' Debate, 25 November 2013

Photo taken from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/toronto-centre-by-election-debate-puts-income-inequality-at-centre-stage/article15542550/

Wednesday’s Toronto Centre All Candidates’ Debate at Jarvis Collegiate was mostly a refreshing change of pace from the political action of late.  The candidates were cordial and engaged, with only a pinch of contention and some audience jeers.  The event drew some 600 people to the audience – a turnout Liberal Party candidate, Chrystia Freeland, noted as a testament to democracy. 

The debate got off to a bit of a raucous start when Independent candidate, John “The Engineer” Turmel, turned up without invitation and refused to leave the stage until police came to escort him out.  The interruption was consistent with the previous Toronto Centre debates (follow the link for a video of Independent Candidate, Kevin Clarke, at the November 17^th debate).   Note that not all the Toronto Centre Candidates were invited to the debate, only those leading in the polls.  See below for the list of all candidates.  Familiarize yourself with the candidates and their platforms and get out to vote on Monday! If you missed the debate, make sure to read on for some insight into your leading candidates.

The debate questions were collected and submitted by the various resident groups from Toronto Centre neighbourhoods, with RPNI representing Regent Park.  Questions covered a broad range of issues including youth engagement, expansion of the Canadian Pension Plan, the Keystone XL pipeline and environmentalism, crime, harm reduction strategies, affordable housing, public transit, etc.  Candidates’ answers to all questions seemed consistent with their respective party platforms.

Conservative Party candidate, Geoff Pollock, relying on the popularity of Stephen Harper as Federal Leader, committed to continuing the Conservative agenda; Linda McQuaig of the NDP maintained her commitment to tackling the income gap through more equitable taxes, and job creation; Liberal Party candidate, Chrystia Freeland,  reiterated her concern about the shrinking middle class, stating the “middle class squeeze is an issue for us all”; John Deverell of the Green Party stressed his commitment to reforming our voting system to proportional representation.

Though candidates took different strategies for each issue, all candidates were united at least on the priority of job creation.  On this topic, NDP candidate McQuaig, confronted Liberal Party candidate Freeland on her choice to outsource 25 American jobs to India when Editor of Reuters, which Freeland justified as part of a larger trend of “shrinking news rooms.”

McQuaig also faced criticism in the debate when she avoided a yea or nay on the Keystone XL pipeline. McQuaig instead stressed the importance of a thorough environmental review before expressing support or not for such contentious projects.  Both the Conservative and Liberal Party candidates expressed support for the pipeline.  Green Party candidate, John Deverell, again emphasized a desire to examine our intentions for growth and the effects on the environment before pursuing the Keystone pipeline or any other projects potentially damaging to the environment.

Other hot topics of the debate included the question of Canadian Pension Plan expansion.  Candidates in support of CPP expansion (including all but the Conservative Party candidate, Geoff Pollock) won generous applause from the audience.  Pollock’s resistance to CPP expansion invited booing from the audience.  The CPP was clearly a unifying issue.

The question of CPP expansion led candidates to discuss their economic positions, with Conservative and Liberal Party candidates both emphasizing a desire to not increase taxes.  Freeland asserted that with economic growth so “anaemic,” the focus should not be on promoting public-private partnerships to encourage business investment instead of raising taxes.  Pollock celebrated the nine free trade agreements created under Conservative government and touted these as promoting economic growth.  For McQuaig, it clear that a fairer tax system is key to economic growth, arguing the need to restore corporate tax cuts and citing Former Bank of Canada Governor, Mark Carney’s, statement that Canada has $500 billion of “dead money” tied up in business.

The last point of agreement for the candidate panel seemed to be support for a national transit strategy, though candidates appeared resistant to explicitly express this support.  On this point, Deverell stressed the importance of a consistent strategy and autonomous spending decisions from the municipalities.  McQuaig also stressed the importance of municipal decisions with regard to transit spending, but all were in agreement that some overarching federal strategy is a priority.

The debate was lively though respectful, the audience thoroughly engaged, offering applause and jeers for the issues deemed most important.  The discussion covered many of these important issues, though there is certainly more at hand.  We encourage you to do some research and make informed voting decisions.  Most important though, get out and vote!

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=ele&document=index&dir=2013/35093/vote&lang=e

November 25^th Toronto Centre By-Election Candidates:

Dorian Baxter
Progressive Canadian Party

Leslie Bory
Independent    

Kevin Clarke
Independent    

John Deverell

Green Party of Canada

Judi Falardeau
Libertarian Party of Canada

Chrystia Freeland

Liberal Party of Canada

               

Linda McQuaig

NDP Party

Michael Nicula
Online Party of Canada

Geoff Pollock

Conservative Party of Canada

John "The Engineer" Turmel
Independent

Bahman Yazdanfar
Independent

City of Toronto Department of Planning and Toronto Community Housing Corporation Follow-Up Community Consultation Recap - Sept. 17th, 2013

What will Regent Park look like after redevelopment is complete?

For more slides from the consultation, visit www.toronto.ca/planning/regentpark/pdf/regentpark_2013-09-09_slides_city.pdf

Regent Park has a rich history of community activism. Residents pushed for the Revitalization of Regent Park and have had continued involvement throughout its progression. As the redevelopment plans for the community change, Regent Park residents continue to participate in these conversations. On June 10^th 2013, the City of Toronto Department of Planning and Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) held a consultation to inform the community of the recent Regent Park development plan amendments proposed by TCHC. Nearly 300 people came out and raised important questions for the planning body. For many, this was the first time they heard the revised plans for their changing neighbourhood. True to Regent Park’s advocating history, residents had a lot to say about the proposal. If you missed the June meeting, please check out our July edition of Community Knewz for a more information.

On September 17^th, 2013, the City of Toronto Department of Planning and Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) held a follow-up consultation with the Regent Park community on yet more proposed amendments to the TCHC development plan, this time, presenting a renewed proposal influenced by the desires of the residents. For most, it seems TCHC's response to resident concerns was encouraging.

At the previous consultation, there was apprehension voiced about the proposed heights of buildings, specifically, the proposal to build a nearly 40 storey tower on the south-east corner of Gerrard St. and Parliament St. Thanks to resident feedback, the tower is now proposed at 20 storeys high, set back from the corner. Other proposed changes include varied building heights along housing at the north side of the big park, decrease in heights of housing along Gerrard St., back-to-back housing facing onto the athletic grounds and street.

 

For more slides from the consultation, visit www.toronto.ca/planning/regentpark/pdf/regentpark_2013-09-09_slides_city.pdf

Still of concern for some residents are the towers proposed along River St. The newest proposal places four towers along River, even though concern was expressed at the June consultation over the heights of then a three towers layout. Though residents were assured at the recent consultation that the tower heights had been decreased, specific tower heights were not given. It appears from the artist rendering above that they would be shorter than the existing towers on the opposite side of River St. at Oak St. Podiums would be built as a step-back from the sidewalk so that buildings are not as intrusive. According to the planning body, River is intended to act as a commercial spine, with retail occupying some space in the towers. In response to resident concerns over these towers, City Planner Angela Stea stressed that the plan would not be approved until these concerns were addressed.

The City continues to insist on maintaining 14 Blevins Place as a heritage building, despite TCHC's request to have it  included in the redevelopment plan and despite overwhelming resident support for its demolition. Many spoke out at the September consultation to say '14 Blevins has to go,' but the City stance is unfettered. Councillor Pam McConnell assured residents that if they wish to see the building demolished, she will ensure that City Council makes this happen.

Throughout the consultation, TCHC stressed that while the specific building plans for Regent Park may change, the principles of redevelopment stay the same; they will continue to build integrated buildings, and replace ALL RGI (TCHC rent geared to income) units demolished. With the proposed changes, population proportions will be 25% RGI units (all replaced units) and 5% additional affordable rental units (where rent is determined at or below 100% of the “average rent” in Toronto). The market units will make up 70% of the population. Of that 70%, 30% of market units are 2 bedroom units, 5% are 3 bedroom units, and 12% are offered with some form of assisted home-ownership programs. When concerns were raised over whether this development plan would result in lower income families and higher income singles/couples, Regent Park resident Kate Sellar suggested that family compositions are changing and not to assume residents in market units are not having families.

During the consultation, we paused to celebrate the unexpected and positive developments of phase 2, including the Aquatic Centre being deemed a priority centre, the new Community Centre being built at double the size originally planned, the Regent Park Athletic Grounds and the additional hectare of space, and the addition of one new daycare in the community (in addition to the two already planned). Residents consistently expressed support for the revitalization project, while not remaining silent about what can be improved upon.

What will Regent Park look like after redevelopment is complete? A seamlessly blended mix of market rental and subsidized housing units is the consistent goal for Regent Park’s Revitalization. However, the specific details of this plan are still being negotiated thanks to an active and engaged community.

The Community Council Meeting will be held November 19^th and the City Council Meeting (where the plan gets final approval) will be held December 16^th. City Councillor Pam McConnell will represent Regent Park; make sure to communicate with her about your feelings on this development plan (see our services page for her contact information). If you’re interested in attending, please contact Debra at debra@rpni.ca

City of Toronto Community Consultation Meeting for the Revitalization of Regent Park Phases 3-5

City of Toronto Community Consultation Meeting for the Revitalization of Regent Park Phases 3-5

Tuesday, September 17, 2013, 7-9 pm

Daniels Spectrum, 585 Dundas Street East

Come and make your voice heard!  As a follow-up to the revitalization plans presented on June 10, 2013, this consultation will present revisions made in response to community concerns.  For example, the 40-storey tower planned for Gerrard and Parliament will now be only 20 storeys!   Obviously, it’s worthwhile to speak out.     

Although good changes have been made to the June 10^th proposal, two issues may still be of concern to the community: (1) the decision not to demolish 14 Blevins (because it is listed as historical), and (2) the plan to keep the density increase at 36%.  Here are some arguments to consider as you make up your own mind.

1. Why should 14 Blevins be torn down?

·        The building will be difficult and expensive to retrofit

o   Water pipes and other major elements have not been kept in repair.

o   The elevator does not go down to the basement.

o   There is no provision for underground parking.

·        Costly renovations will mean less money for good social housing.

o   The Historical Board provides no funds to preserve the buildings it lists.

·        The building will look out of place.

o   Situated at an angle, it will not follow the grid of the streets as will all other buildings.

o   In an entirely new neighbourhood, it will be the only old building.

·        Regent Park is about people, not buildings.  Their stories are what need to be remembered.

Please take a moment to sign the petition to advocate for the demolition of 14 Blevins Place.

2.  Why should the density not be raised by 36%?

(Before any redevelopment, Regent Park had a population of roughly 7,500.  The original revitalization plan projected a population of 12,500.  Then the June 10^th amendment shot that projection up to 17,000 – a 36% increase.)

·        With more people, services will be under strain.

o   Parks and streets will be more crowded.

o   If mothers currently line up at 4:00 am to enlist their children in swimming lessons, imagine how early they must rise in the future.

·        The voices of those who live in social housing will not be heard.

o   Since all the additional units will be market-value, social housing units will, in future, comprise only 25% of the total.

·        The need for money should not jeopardize the health of the neighbourhood. 

o   TCHC says it needs more condo sales to offset the cost of replacing social housing.  If so, why was the initial revitalization plan so flawed that a 36% increase in density is now needed?  And will the new business plan require even more density if the condo market falls?  TCHC needs to plan cautiously, for increased densities come at a cost to the social health of the neighbourhood.

These are ideas to think about.  Please come to the September 17^th meeting to express your own views.

Regent Park Legacy Funds

What would you do with $600,000 for the community?

During the early 1980s, Regent Park residents had a vision for a community centre run by residents. To support this vision, Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) households voluntarily committed $2 per month for three years, adding up to $10,000.

However, during the fundraising period, the South Community Centre was built without using any of the funds raised. And so the money was then designated to create opportunities for training and employment for people to take over the management of the Community Centre. Unfortunately, this never happened, and in the late 1990s the management of the Centre was turned over to the City of Toronto, thus leaving the funds untouched. 

In addition to the contributions from the residents, various levels of governments provided an additional $160,000 of funding to match the $160,000 generated by residents. Interest on these funds has continued to accumulate over the years, resulting in the funds totalling $600,000. The funds we now refer to as “Legacy Funds.”

Residents have always been mindful of the funds and have entrusted the City of Toronto and TCHC to keep the interest-generating funds, ensuring that the money remained available to the community.

As Regent Park continues to undergo a tremendous amount of change, we now have a good sense of what the community amenities will be, and we are in a better position to determine how the Legacy Funds can be used.

So, what would you do with $600,000 for the community?

What types of ideas can be funded with this money?

The Legacy Funds can be spent on ideas that benefit the Regent Park community in a way that honours local capacity building and leaves and a lasting community legacy.

Possible ideas include:

Scholarship fund for the Regent Park Community;

A community microloan project;

A capital addition to an existing or planned building in the community.

What types of ideas cannot be funded?

The following ideas cannot be funded with the Legacy Funds:

Ideas that require additional funding from the  City or TCHC;

Purchasing real estate;

Gifting money to individuals or groups (excludes scholarships);

Using the money for religious groups or ideas that only service one portion of the population. 

As we move forward as a new, revitalized community, we need to ensure that we are inclusive of everyone. New and existing members of the Regent Park Community will have an opportunity to articulate how the Legacy Funds are used for the benefit of the whole community. This is a unique opportunity to really shape the future success of the Regent Park community. Let’s get talking, Regent Park!

A final decision about how the Legacy Funds will be used will be made by October 2013 and will be communicated to Regent Park residents. The final use of the funds has to be approved by City Council and the TCHC Board of Directors.

If you want more information or to offer feedback contact Julio Rigores at Julio.rigores@torontohousing.ca or at 416-981-4271, or Leah Ross at lross2@toronto.ca at 416-932-8492.

14 Blevins Place: A Heritage Site to Remember or Forget?

What’s so special about 14 Blevins Place?

The high-rise apartment building in South Regent looks exactly like the others surrounding it – red-brick, poorly maintained, poor lighting around entrances to the building, quite like most of the housing in Regent Park slated for redevelopment. Why then, when phase 3 of the Regent Park Redevelopment rolls around, will 14 Blevins Place remain standing while surrounding others are demolished and rebuilt to higher standards of living and beauty? **Update: Since this blog entry was published, the Preservation Board met and determined to not designate the building as a Heritage property -- thanks to active engagement from our Regent Park residents.**

During the original planning of the Revitalization in 2004, City staff proposed that one of the low-rise residential buildings characteristic of North Regent, and one of the high-rise residential buildings characteristic of South Regent, be retained. They were to be “preserved and adaptively reused so that the use of the property as a public housing project for over 50 years would be commemorated” (Toronto Staff Report 2*). Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) agreed to the preservation of one of the high-rise apartment buildings in South Regent only, and so 14 Blevins Place was recommended for inclusion on the City of Toronto Inventory of Heritage Properties, exempt from demolition and slated for preservative repurposing.

Why then were the buildings in North Regent determined unfit for preservation, while not so for the high-rises of South Regent? The preservation of 14 Blevins Place has been attributed to the fact that at the time of building, in the late 1950s, the Blevins high-rises were considered “a major advancement in public housing” (Toronto Staff Report 3*), designed by renowned architect Peter Dickinson, and winner of the Massey Medal for Architecture. The design featured “two-storey apartments that separated the bedrooms from the living space and enabled units to front onto both sides of the building” (Toronto Staff Report 3*). At the time of City consultation with the community there was support for the preservation of this building and none for preserving the town houses in the north. However, it has been nearly a decade since these consultations and support from the community for the preservation of 14 Blevins Place is hard to find.

We have been hearing from the community that they want 14 Blevins Place demolished as part of phase 3 of the Redevelopment of Regent Park. I spoke with one 14 Blevins Place resident who gave us a clearer understanding of why it must go.

Our interviewee immigrated to Canada in 1986 and has been living in Regent Park nearly ever since. She currently lives in 14 Blevins Place in Regent Park, and has been there for 12 years. I spoke with her about her experience living in 14 Blevins and whether she was aware of development plans to keep the building as a heritage site.

Though she says she likes living in the building, she has several frustrations around the living conditions. As we have heard already expressed from others, our interviewee noted serious issues of leaks, and building maintenance. The elevator, she says, is frequently soiled with urine and smoke (which we have heard from others including that the elevator frequently doesn’t work). Many neighbours complain of mice and cockroaches, and some even have issues with bedbugs.

Our interviewee illustrates her frustrations with an anecdote about her fridge. When she first moved into the building she noticed that the fridge was not in good shape – food was spoiling because it was not cool enough. She filed complaints with housing management,but nothing was done until it completely broke down 10 years later on Christmas Eve. In a rush, she had to prepare her Christmas feast at her friend’s place,desperate to salvage the food already starting to go bad in the broken refrigerator. The fridge was not replaced until the third week of January,leaving her to cope without the appliance for a month. The hesitance on the part of building management to replace the malfunctioning appliance is a trending frustration, no doubt compelled by the lack of incentive to invest in a building that will be either demolished or become City property.

Though a resident of the building for over a decade, our interviewee was unaware of the plans to keep 14 Blevins Place as a heritage building. When I asked her whether she was in support of this plan she immediately responded that she was not, and expressed confusion over the desire to maintain a building that was so neglected. She further noted the potential risk involved in maintaining a building with health risks such as insect and rodent infestation, expressing concern that these infestations, if allowed to fester, might just spread to the new buildings and recreate the problem.

At the most recent City consultation with the community on June 10th (see our June Newsletter or blog entry for a recap of this event), two 14 Blevins Place residents addressed City Planners to request the demolition of the building to audience applause. City Planner, Angela Stea, was receptive to this feedback but informed us that in order for there to be a change in the Development Plan, others need to speak up – so we have taken to the streets! We have been out in the community, talking with residents and finding that they echo our interviewee’s sentiments. Already, we have gathered many signatures on our petition for the building’s demolition. Additionally, we have started a petition that can be accessed at:

https://www.change.org/petitions/city-of-toronto-demolish-14-blevins-place-as-part-of-phase-3-of-regent-park-revitalization

If you, like many of your neighbours, feel 14 Blevins Place has no value in our Revitalized Regent Park, please sign the petition for its removal. To maintain the building as a heritage site is to maintain a reminder of the poor living conditions and neglect that residents have endured all these years. This simply does not fit with the theme of revitalization. 14 Blevins Place has well-served its usefulness, and as community members we do not want to see the preservation of this building for any use moving forward.

These kinds of decisions are important in maintaining the health of the community, and it is essential that residents participate in these decisions. Sign the petition, or email in your support for the plan, but make your voice heard. Our work at the Regent Park Neighbourhood Initiative is informed by you, and as such your engagement is critical. Currently, we are seeking to hear from the community on their feelings of social inclusion. Take the survey and help us to seek needed changes in the community and preserve what really matters to you.

* To read the Toronto Staff report visit  http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2005/agendas/committees/te/te050118/it029.pdf

Our Regent Park Timeline

Regent Park has a very rich history, which is still being written. This is a community that has always demonstrated resilience and determination, exemplified in a culture of activism and artistic expression.

These media continue to express the diversity of the community. Regent Park’s true story is that of the many residents who have called this place home. We are therefore looking for your help to tell this community’s true history.

How has Regent Park changed throughout the years and how has it changed you? Who made up the community for you and what makes Regent Park feel like home?

We want to hear these stories: everything from the day you first arrived here, to your youthful shenanigans in Stinky’s park, to your dreams and hopes for the future.

Let’s not forget the great roots of this vastly evolving neighbourhood, where all this growth started.

Send us these stories and we will post them on our website. To see what sorts of stories your neighbours are already telling visit our history page.

Regent Park Relocation, Return, Resettle

We’ve been a part of many discussions lately concerning the Revitalization of Regent Park, and often the conversation ends up centring on the relocation processes, so we thought that we would try to help sort out the issues and challenges that folks have been living with, in hopes to provide some clarity.

Relocation (Temporary Unit)

Relocation is required in order to demolish the existing buildings in Regent Park. Families living in units slated for redevelopment will be directed to move from their current home to another Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) unit. This unit may be located in Regent Park, slated for later redevelopment, or in another community in the City. Residents will stay in their relocation unit until their new home is built, which can be anywhere between 2 and 5 years.

About a year before your move from your original location, you will receive a notice, called a Demolition Notice, from TCHC telling you that demolition of your existing home will happen in approximately one year.

Within 3-9 months after you receive that notice, you will be invited to attend a meeting where you will be assigned a number that is selected via a random draw. This number will be the order in which a relocation unit will be offered to you. After that   you will get a package indicating the available units in the unit size for which your household is eligible. You will then be asked to set a one-on-one meeting with a member of TCHC’s Relocation Office. 

Your family will have a few days to discuss the options for relocation, and you will then identify your top choices for relocation units by filling out a form at the one-on-one meeting with the Relocation Staff.  Once all the eligible residents’ one-on-one meetings are held, and everyone has made their relocation choices, TCHC will make offers of units to residents in the order of their random draw number. TCHC will continue to work with you to find a new home that meets your family’s needs through the “family composition” process (numbers and ages of family members in the dwelling determine how many rooms you are entitled to). If there are no suitable units available at the time of the first round of offers, TCHC will schedule additional meetings with you to find a unit that works for your family.

Once you’ve selected your new home, TCHC will work with you to ensure you have boxes available for packing. TCHC will also pay certain fees related to your move, including disconnect/reconnect fees with utility or cable companies,  postal fees for forwarding mail, as well as providing professional movers to move your belongings into your new home.

At the lease signing of your temporary new unit, you will also sign a “Relocation Agreement,” which means that when the new housing is built in Regent Park, you will have the right to come back. 

Return (Regent Park Unit)

If moving back to Regent Park doesn’t work for you when you receive notice that a new building is ready, you may waive the right to return to Regent Park and stay in your relocation unit instead. In some cases, you have the right to defer your return to a later date or the next phase.

When a new building is almost ready to have tenants move in, TCHC will hold another random draw meeting that you will be invited to attend. Your name will again be selected in another random draw along with other families’ names also waiting return. Your random number will assign the order in which your family will be offered a new unit in Regent Park. At the unit selection meeting, TCHC will provide floor plans of options for new units, and set up a one-on-one meeting with your family to determine your needs and which options of units you would like to select. Once everyone in this phase of return has had their one-on-one meeting, TCHC will offer units to residents based on the order of the random draw, and you will have an opportunity to accept or decline this offer.

What you should know is that during the return process, you will again go through the “family composition” processes to determine how many bedrooms your family requires, based on the number and ages of family members living with you. This is the same process you would have gone through when you first applied for housing, and again when you relocated to your temporary home.

You should also know that the architectural designs of today differ greatly from those used in the 1940s, which means that homes are smaller, but typically much more efficient in their layout, so you may not have the same amount of square footage in your new home as was in your old home.  Additionally, more high-rises are being built as opposed to townhouses or low-rises, so your new Regent Park home may be in a different building type than your old Regent Park home.

Once you have confirmed your offer of a new home and your return to Regent Park, TCHC will once again make sure that you have boxes, and a moving company to assist you in your move. TCHC will again reimburse you for any utility, cable, or postal fees related to your move.

Resettle

You’ll come back to a community that has changed and neighbours that you’ve never met before. It will take you some time to figure out what’s going on and where things are happening, so we encourage you to stay as connected as possible through the Regent Park Neighbourhood Initiative on our website, facebook or twitter account, so that you’re up to date with all things Regent Park.

If you have any questions or concerns about the process as described, please contact Debra at debra@rpni.ca.

Regent Park Revitalization: June 10th Community Consultation with the City on Plan Amendments

Last Monday, June 10^th, Regent Park gathered to discuss the revitalization plans. The City of Toronto Department of Planning and Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) held a consultation with the community on the recent development plan amendments proposed by TCHC. The turnout for the consultation was impressive, with the entire Ada Slaight Hall auditorium in the Daniels Spectrum building nearly filled to capacity. 

The topic of the consultation was the following changes to the development plan for Regent Park proposed by TCHC:*

• Increase from 5,400 to 7,500 social and market housing units at the completion of all phases
• Increase the projected population from 12,500 to approximately 17,000 at the completion of all phases
• Removal of two small parkettes replaced by a new larger park/sports field  and adjustment to permitted land use designations, blocks and streets proposed  to reflect reconfigurations of park spaces
• Addition of commercial parking garage as a permitted use
• Demolition of heritage listed 14 Blevins building and proposal for a 60m tower on this block
• Increase of building heights in some locations including but not limited to:
• Two additional 88m towers on Dundas St E (Phase 3)
• One new 120m tower on Parliament Street (Phase 4)
• Sites on north side of central park and site on River Street – currently permitted at  22m & 30m, proposed increase to 50m 

* (From the City website: visit http://www.toronto.ca/planning/regentpark.htm)

Not expressed in this list of amendments is the population proportional change that would occur with the construction of additional market housing units. The proposed plan amendments shift the population proportion from an approximate 60-40% split to a proposed 75-25% split -- owners to renters. (Though TCHC maintains a consistent 50-50% split as, for example, a house of TCHC residents with two adults and three children would be counted as equal to five single-dwelling market housing units). Though residents in attendance vocalised their concerns about the proposed changes, the focus of apprehension was on the height of the proposed towers rather than the proportional shift in population mix.

Specific unease was expressed over the proposed height of a tower to be built on the corner of Gerrard and Parliament (120 metres). Residents had a number of concerns about its height, including blocking sunlight in surrounding buildings, contrasting with the historical architecture of the area, increasing density/traffic in an already congested corner, and once again secluding Regent Park as an insular and inward-facing island. According to the City representatives, John Gladki and Angela Stea, anxiety around the buildings height had been vocalized prior to the consultation. Throughout the consultation, the audience was reassured that the community’s displeasure would be noted and addressed in the next planning stages.

The new proposed tower heights

Others noted concerns around amenities being able to support the population influx, and what this increase would mean for access to programming. In response, it was noted that the increased green space in the plan amendments should hopefully provide more programming opportunities. It was also noted that strained access to City facilities is a challenge all across Toronto, and that this drawback is difficult to avoid.

Besides the new athletic field, the most welcome plan amendment proposed was clearly the demolition of the tower at 14 Blevins Place. Residents came out to voice their support for its deconstruction, offering poignant examples of the challenges faced daily for those residing in the dilapidated heritage building.

TCHC Chief Development Officer, Greg Spearn, represented TCHC at the consultation, and spoke about the rationale behind amendments to the development plan. Spearn cited deficits, specifically miscalculations on the district energy system, and desire for early completion of the development as reasons for the increase in market unit builds. For some this did not justify the changes proposed, but for all it seemed clear that compromise will have to be made by all parties in order for Revitalization to continue.

For more information on these proposed changes and the process for approval, please visit www.toronto.ca/planning/regentpark.htm.

Proposed Population Density Changes in Regent Park -- Community Consultation June 10, 2013

The Regent Park community may soon see a significant population expansion.  Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) and Daniels Corporation have submitted a rezoning application to be voted upon by City Council to increase the density in Regent Park from 5400 to 7500 units. This proposed plan moves the population proportion from a approximately 60-40% split to a proposed 75-25% split (owners to renters).

There hasn't been a lot of discussion so far about why these changes are being proposed and how they affect the community, but these are significant potential changes. Today, Monday, June 10th, the City will be hosting a Community Consultation on these proposed changes at 7p.m. in the Daniels Spectrum: 585 Dundas St. East. Make sure to come out to hear more about these changes and how they may impact you.

During a recent conference held at the Canadian Urban Institute on the topic of Lessons Learned from Revitalization in Regent Park, TCHC Chief Development Officer, Greg Spearn, spoke quite candidly about the decision to shift proportions. Spearn revealed that as of the completion of Phase 2, the organization will be facing a $8million deficit, and this change keeps the Revitalization viable. 

The shift in proportion is not the only solution being proposed by the TCHC - Daniels Corp partnership. Spearn also revealed that the organization has taken on Royal Bank of Canada as a lending partner to alleviate some of the financial strain. Additionally, financial restructuring of TCHC properties and the retail development are intended to partially subsidize the Revitalization. 

Clear from the presentation, was the desire on the part of all stakeholders to find ways to continue Revitalization.

These proposed changes in proportion will likely have the largest impact, however, and it is important the community stay actively engaged in this process to ensure the health of Regent Park. Make sure to participate in these discussions.

Again, the City of Toronto will be hosting a community consultation on June 10^th at 7 p.m. at the Daniels Spectrum.  We encourage you to attend and voice your opinions.

Hey All,

Just a reminder that this coming Monday June 10th at 7 p.m. at the Daniels Spectrum the City of Toronto will be hosting a community consultation on the re-zoning and site plan amendment applications.  Please come out and ensure your voice is heard!

Launch of the Regent Park Farmers' Market

Yesterday was the launch of the Regent Park Farmers’ Market, and Regent Park Boulevard** was bustling with patrons taking in all that the vendors had to offer (see the full list at the end of this post).  The Market will be running every Wednesday, until October 30^th, from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. and will be serving locally grown foods and locally made goodies.

BBQ corn, butterfish sandwiches, samosas, smoothies, and butter tarts were just some of the food people were enjoying yesterday. Homemade breads, spices, organic herbs, and fresh root vegetables were in abundance. This market is aimed to be different from others in the city; Regent Park Farmers' Market is an affordable option where you will experience the wonderful diversity found in the community.  

Besides the delicious food and treats, the atmosphere was lovely. In many instances, people were meeting each other for the first time on the Boulevard and taking time out to engage with their neighbours. Several of the vendors were from Regent Park and provided some cultural favourites that will surely keep you coming back every week. The Market truly has something for everyone and is a lovely place to meet new people in the community.

We see a bright future for the Regent Park Farmers’ Market and hope you will support this endeavour. We will have a table there each week and hope you will stop by and say hi. For more information about the market please visit their website at www.regentparkfarmersmarket.ca.

**Regent Park Boulevard has not yet been officially named. It is the street colloquially known as "Street P Parking," running north/south on the East side of the Daniels Spectrum. Make sure to come out to the official street naming the same day as Sunday in the Park, on July 7th.

This list is of the venders at the market June 5, 2013. List will change throughout the season.

• Arman Farmers' Market (Wali) - bbq corn / coconut juice / sugar cane juice = RP local resident & hero
• Fish Shack (Ali) - cod fish & veggie fritters / fish & veggie sandwiches / homemade juices
• Hymark Farms (Zach) - beans / potatoes / other fresh produce = will also have Halal Goat at future markets
• Southern Horizon (Margaret & Rodney) - fresh greens / root vegetables
• The Food Smyth (Dave) - artisan cheeses
• Simply Buds (Maryann & Andrew) - raspberry & blueberry berliners / pecan tarts = RP local residents who cooked at Paintbox Bistro
• Exact Edge (Denzil) - knife sharpening
• Incredible Spices (Sanjiz) - all homemade spice blends / sauces / dips and samosas / mango lassi
• Red Pocket Farm (Amy) - fresh greens / root vegetables
• Wicklow Way (Greg & Elaina) - organic vegetables / flowers / honey
• De la Terre Bakery (Chad) - fresh baked assorted breads / muffins / date squares = they grow their own grain for the breads / treats
• Fathima's Tasty Treats (Fathima & Ahamed) - veggies & chicken samosas / fish balls / cupcakes = RP local residents who cooked at Paintbox Bistro
• Sally's Spring Rolls (Sally) - veggie & chicken spring rolls / chutney = RP local resident (caters many community events) = cooked at Paintbox Bistro
• Fresh City Farms (Arlene) - fresh greens / broccoli / root vegetables
• Paintbox Bistro's Boxie - coffee / fruit smoothies