Etobicoke Humane Society Halloween 2010 Update

“To protect, care for and advance the welfare of animals”.

Affiliate of Ontario SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals)
www.etobicokehumanesociety.com

NO SCAREDY CATS , PLEASE! 
Halloween Safety Tips for Pets
Maria Barnes, Public Relations & Education Coordinator
Etobicoke Humane Society
Halloween can be a fun-filled time for children and adults, too.  But it can be a scary time for our pets.   The Etobicoke Humane Society asks you to please remember these pet safety tips when the hobgoblins gather this year:
1. No tricks and no treats for pets:  Chocolate in all forms can be very dangerous for dogs and cats.  Tin foil and cellophane wrappers can be dangerous or deadly if swallowed. If you think your pet has ingested a potentially dangerous substance, please call your veterinarian or the nearest emergency vet clinic. Keep related phone numbers handy for fast reference.
2. Some Hazards in Plants: Halloween traditions such as pumpkins and decorative corn are generally non-toxic, but they can cause gastrointestinal upset if pets ingest them.  Larger ingested pieces can even cause intestinal blockage.
3. Electrical Hazards: Don’t let pets chew wires and cords. Keep them safely out of reach of your pets. If you pet chews electrical cords or wires, he could experience damage to his mouth due to shards of glass or plastic, or even experience a life-threatening electrical shock.
4. Candle Cautions:  Use extreme caution with candles, even when placed inside pumpkins. Pets can easily knock over a lit pumpkin and cause a fire. Kittens and puppies are at even greater risk of getting burned or singed by lit candles.
5. Don’t mess-up with dress-up: Please don't use costumes on your dog or cat unless you’re absolutely sure they REALLY enjoy it. Costumes can cause stress for many animals, and many costumes are flammable, which adds additional hazards. Masks are best left for people.
6. Safe costumes only: If you do dress up your pet, make sure the costume is NOT FLAMMABLE, and isn’t too tight or too loose (extra material can get your pet caught in something). . A costume or mask should not hinder your pet’s movement, hearing, vision or ability to breathe. Watch out for easily chewed pieces of costume that could cause choking. This protects your pet from injury and helps prevent irrtiabitiy; an irritable pet can be a snappy pet. Masks are best left off your pet.
7. Provide a quiet haven: Most dogs and cats should be kept in a separate, quiet room during the busiest trick –or-treat hours. All the noise and dangers can be very stressful for pets. Only the most social pets should be exposed to the Halloween hauntings.
8. Watch those doors: When opening your door for trick-or-treaters, make sure your pet doesn’t run outside. Besides the risk of being lost, there are many accounts of Halloween hooligans who have teased, chased, injured, stolen and even killed pets.
9. IDs:.* Be certain that your pet has current, proper identification; i.e., microchip and/or collar and tag, just in case your pet escapes during the Halloween festivities.

1500 Royal York Rd., Suite E, Etobicoke, Ontario M9P 3B6

Office/Shelter Phone: 416-249-6100; Registered Charity: #131167629RR0001

Follow us on Twitter! kpritoronto
http://twitter.com/#!/kpritoronto

Directors and Contacts

KPRI Executive e-mail us: kpri@kpri.ca

Office:	Name:	Tel#:	E-mail:	Address:
Vice-President	Armand Conant	416-233- 9962	aconant@sympatico.ca	64 Belvedere Boulevard
Director	Mary Campbell	416-231-0180	marycampbell@sympatico.ca
Treasurer	James Clarke
Secretary	Karen Rankine	416-236-4950		7 Montgomery Road
Newsletter	Fiona Campbell	416-232-2243	info@bermudarentals.com	184 Prince Edward Drive
Director, CPLC Rep	John Prince
Director	Anna Traer
Director	Dick Thomson	416-233-3659

Useful Telephone Numbers

Urban Development Services

(Planning & Building Permits):	416-394-8002
Committee of Adjustment:	416-394-8060
Municipal Licensing & Standards:	416-394-2535
Councilor Peter Milczyn:	416-392-4040
Etobicoke Guardian Newspaper:	416-675-4390
Catholic School Trustee (Ann Andrachuk):	416-512-3402
Public School Trustee (Bruce Davis):	416-393-1972
22 Division Police (non-emergency):	416-808-2225
eRenovate http://www.eRenovate.com	416-736-6828

Useful Websites

KPRI	http://www.kingswayratepayers.com
City of Toronto Web Site	http://www.city.toronto.on.ca
TOCA	http://www.toca.ca/default.htm
Etobicoke Guardian	http://www.mirror-guardian.com
Toronto Catholic School Board	http://www.tcdsb.org
Toronto Public School Board	http://www.tdsb.on.ca
Toronto Police	http://www.torontopolice.on.ca

Old Mill 10-Storey Condo Approved by City Council (26-12)

A battle to save 322 trees and stop development on green space along the Humber River was lost. On March 4, City Council approved a 10-storey condominium building on the upper parking lot across the street from the historic Old Mill Inn despite much opposition from councillors backed by KPRI, Old Millside Residents' Association, Swansea Area Ratepayers, Warren Park Ratepayers Association, Confederation of Resident & Ratepayer Associations in Toronto (CORRA - representing some 24 ratepayer associations city-wide, of which KPRI is a member), Humber Heritage Committee, Swansea Historical Society and many residences. 

A sense of being in a unique enclave of the city with a view of the vast Humber Ravine will soon be lost to urban development. A new precedent has been set along the Humber River and on green space throughout the city. For this development, it means rezoning the site from R2 to R6 and an amendment to the Toronto Official Plan to change the site from "Parks and Open Space Areas - Natural Areas" to "Apartment Neighbourhood". No where else in the immediate area is property rated R6. 

Councillor Peter Milczyn brought the motion before council in support of the application. He cites support for the project by staff - Toronto & Region Conservation Authority, Urban Foresty and City Planning. Staff have made recommendations, including an extensive ecological restoration and new trees to replace the ones cut down. However, staff only comment on the affects to the environment and make recommendations. They do not comment on whether it is good planning. Here is an example where the community is not empowered to stop development on green space and the City is not protecting, improving and adding green space as it said it would in the Toronto Official Plan.

Yours truly,
Board of Directors
Kingsway Park Ratepayers Inc.

Community Upset as City Approves Old Mill 10-Storey Condo

KPRI trying to find out how much the land was sold for: Community Upset as City Approves Old Mill 10-Storey Condo on Green Space

From KPRI Spring 2008 Newsletter

By: Anna Traer – KPRI Director

The Kingsway Park Ratepayers Inc. (KPRI), together with 25 ratepayer associations, 2 heritage and historical groups and some 200 residents, opposed the application for a 10-storey condominium building on land along the Humber River Valley and across from the historic Old Mill Inn (“the Land”). The Land is designated in the Toronto Official Plan as “Parks and Open Space Areas – Natural Areas” and it is part of Toronto’s Green Space System as described in the Toronto Official Plan.

All efforts to save 322 trees and stop this development on Green Space was dismissed by City Council on March 4, 2008 when Councillors voted 26-12 in favour of the development by the applicant, Sanek Investments Inc., on behalf of the owners of the Old Mill Inn. As a result, firstly, the Toronto Official Plan will be amended to change the site from "Parks and Open Space Areas - Natural Areas" to "Apartment Neighbourhood". Many residents believe that the integrity of the Toronto Official Plan has been weakened by the fact that its policies setting out to protect, improve and add to the Green Space System have not been upheld. Secondly, the Land will be rezoned for the third time as detailed below.

1. 1963 - rezoned from Second Density Residential Classification (R2) to Limited Commercial Classification provided that the Land's use was limited to automobile parking only in conjunction with the Old Mill. Note that in 1981, the Old Mill Inn and restaurant was exempted from zoning with respect to standards for restaurants because of the unique and distinct land use and significant historical, architectural and scenic interest of the Old Mill.
2. 1985 - rezoned from Limited Commercial to Private Open Space under a condition that no buildings are to be erected on the existing Old Mill parking area (further details below).
3. [2008] - approved by Council for rezoning from Private Open Space to Sixth Density Residential Classification (R6).

No where in the Staff Reports dated January 25, 2008 and February 11, 2008 were restrictive covenants prohibiting construction of any buildings on the Lands mentioned. No where else in the immediate area is property rated R6.
Councillors heard from the community, including deputations by KPRI on behalf of itself and the Confederation of Resident & Ratepayer Associations in Toronto (CORRA - representing some 24 ratepayer associations city-wide, of which KPRI and SARA are members), Old Millside Residents' Association, Swansea Area Ratepayers’ Association (SARA), Warren Park Ratepayers’ Association, Humber Heritage Committee and Swansea Historical Society. Almost every one was in opposition to the development. Below are approximate numbers of residents and associations that opposed the development during the City process.

• 70 residents at the Community Consultation Meeting held on April 17, 2007.
• 40 residents and 6 representatives of ratepayers’ associations, heritage and historical organizations, many of whom braved a winter storm and made a deputation before a fully packed chamber hall at the Etobicoke York Community Council meeting (“EYCC”) on February 12, 2008.
• 167 residents and 26 ratepayers associations sent a communication to the City Clerk, many of whom sought a deferral of the ‘Old Mill item’ before City Council on March 3 – 4, 2008 so that Staff Reports dated January 25, 2008 and February 11, 2008 could be reviewed for deficiencies.

Was 18 days sufficient time for the community that strongly opposed the development to review the Staff Report dated January 25 before EYCC on February 12? Was 1 day sufficient time to review the Supplementary Staff Report dated February 11 before EYCC?Was the development rushed through the City process?
Councillor Holyday’s motion to receive the Staff Report was narrowly defeated by City Council (15-21). If granted, it would have provided an opportunity for ratepayers and residents to bring information to Councillors so that their vote may be given with full knowledge of all issues in favour of and in opposition to the development. For example, 10 days after the vote, KRPI obtained a copy of the former City of York Council minutes of September 17, 1984. Item 831 dealt with the Land in which an amendment to the Official Plan and rezoning of the Land was conditional upon the execution of a three party agreement (City of York, Old Mill Investments Limited and Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority) entitled “Agreement to Prohibit Erection of Structures”, whereby the City of York required that the Old Mill and Conservation Authority covenant with the City of York that no buildings are to be erected on the existing Old Mill parking area within the Regional Flood Plan as presently defined by the Conservation Authority and on the lands which are to be acquired from the City of York for the expansion of the Old Mill parking lot. This agreement was not dealt with in the Staff Reports. Neither did the Staff Reports highlight impacts on Parks and Open Space Areas - Natural Areas. 
Councillor Peter Milczyn’s motion to approve the application cites support for the development by staff - Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), Urban Forestry and City Planning. Staff made recommendations, which included an extensive ecological restoration and replacement of trees cut down. Toronto Tree Advocate Joe Pantalone, in consultation with Peter Milczyn, brought amendments to the motion to ensure the applicant will replace trees by a 3:1 ratio. Is this ratio sufficient given that tree canopy replacement may require a greater ratio? Is it acceptable that many of the replacement trees will be planted in the parklands nearby since there is insufficient space to plant them on site? 
City Council will be required to approve the site plan subject to a community consultation process addressing concerns such as urban design, landscaping, sidewalk and traffic.
A sense of being in a unique enclave of the City with a view of the vast Humber Ravine is lost to urban development. A precedent has been set along the Humber River and on Green Space throughout the city. 

Should this development be brought before the Ontario Municipal Board? Should not City Council protect, improve and add to green space as it said it would in its own Toronto Official Plan? Only you can make a difference by having your say by talking to or writing your ratepayers' association and local Councillor what you think, and voting at the next municipal election.