Over the last couple months Council has received petitions from residents requesting a variety of changes to municipal property:  installation of speed bumps and modifications to development plans such that a sidewalk is not poured and a landscaped island is not built. The requests illustrate clearly that there is not unanimity in what makes a neighbourhood the one where you want to live.  Compared to the big decisions Council makes on an application for a subdivision, for example, these issues appear small.  But, they are important for those who petitioned and for me there is a complexity which makes them tough.  As a Council member, do I put priority on the desires of current residents/constituents OR do I think about the longer term picture?

1. Residents on Burton Grove in King City have been talking about  a traffic problem on their street for past year; not only is there the volume of commuter traffic associated with the GO train station but the traffic is travelling too fast.   Per the Township protocol a petition was created; >70% residents on the affected street supported speed bumps and the analysis of Staff supported it also. To confirm the effectiveness of the speed bumps and to confirm the willingness of the street to live with speed bumps Council agreed with the Staff recommendation to install temporary ones.  The speed bumps are now in place and feedback is being collected. 

2.  Residents in the Fandor Development in Nobleton created a petition asking that a sidewalk scheduled to be installed on their street not be installed.  Majority of Council, including myself, agreed with the Staff recommendation to NOT fulfill the petition’s request; you can read the Staff report here.

I was motivated primarily by 3 points.

• The petition did not really reflect the position of the whole street as the street is not fully built out yet.  
• I hear from many people living in older subdivisions without sidewalks, that they regret very much the lack of such but they realize that it is cost prohibitive for Township to do a retrofit, so to speak.  (When the sidewalks are built as part of a new subdivision the cost is borne by the developer.)   
• The concept of “walkability” and connecting neighbourhoods is a characteristic we are striving for in all our neighbourhoods today.  Sidewalks are important in achieving this; not only do sidewalks connect to other sidewalks but they will also connect to the trails which will be created in the green spaces around then subdivisions. 

3.  Residents in another new subdivision in Nobleton, Nobleridge created a petition asking that a planned landscaped island in a cul-de-sac not be created. The landscaped islands were clearly identified and included in the subdivision’s plans.  

It was the Staff recommendation to NOT fulfill the petition’s request; you can read their report here. Council deferred a decision as some additional information about ongoing maintenance cost and further verification of the physical plan was requested.  

Basis the information provided to date I am not supportive of the petition’s request.  As the Staff report reviews such islands are an important piece of the storm water management plan for the subdivision; specifically the island will absorb rain water and hence reduces the amount runoff to downstream water courses.   Further, I believe that the planned island provides a desirable aesthetic as opposed to an unbroken expanse of pavement; given the significant design features in this subdivision to provide an upscale prestigious impression I don’t know why this street should be second class;   I wonder how the 2^nd owner of the homes on this street will feel?

The proposal to not have the island does not have unanimous support of the residents.  One resident with children spoke strongly in favour of continuing with the plan as he believes that the island will serve as a traffic calming measure.  The decision is not about one subdivision; we need to assume that residents in the other 7 streets with a cul-de-sac might do likewise.

Although I do not agree with the objectives of some of these petitions I am very happy to see residents engaged and seeking to influence their community’s character.  When I do not agree I hope my rationale for such is understood.