04-24-2018, 08:48 AM
(04-24-2018, 12:18 AM)MacBerry Wrote:(04-23-2018, 12:47 PM)nms Wrote: Just a couple quick thoughts:Part 1
1. Is zoning typically tied to stories or to a height regardless of how many stories are planned?
2. Was the deferral to allow Council time to complete the adoption of the various PARTS recommendations?
3. Does this project still qualify for an OMB appeal, or would it be subject to the OMB replacement, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT)?
I could imagine (optimistically) that Council would want to have PARTS completely enacted before there is a decision on this project. If not, either side could appeal to OMB/LPAT. If the project is subject to LPAT, then having PARTS in place makes it easier for the City to win its case at LPAT provided the project checks off all of the boxes.
"then having PARTS in place makes it easier for the City to win its case at LPAT"
Are you saying the City does not want the project and would argue this at LPAT?
I believe that projects like this in the making for 3-5 years are still subject to OMB legislation and hearings. Just because they straddle the date for old out and new in doesn't allow the City to just say no and go to LPAT. The City can't defer the project until July just to move from OMB to LPAT ... developers will sue for all costs and damages.
If cities like Kitchener use the LPAT developers will stop developing ... hopefully when the city works with a developer for 3-5-8 years they don't change direction as they are doing here because it is an election year.
Part 2
LPAT when implemented will also not be just a way for complainants (either city/developers/individuals) to force issues out of the development phases. Change by either side and by individuals must be rationale and not just putting up a figurative fence on any project to delay or cause withdrawal by developers. The new system will potentially grind to a halt if every complaint/complainant is seen as requiring a hearing and a lawyer to go to the LPAT and thus the lawyers will win and everyone else will lose.
Lastly the legal costs for complainants now must be paid by the taxpayers? At what ever level and by whom? Also there is the potential for increased legal costs by the City or any local level if all complaints are guaranteed a hearing.
Thoughts?
On topic of PARTS, has anyone seen the updating "map" of the city in regards to PARTS (it has all the new buildings, ones already in the books, but also ones they are hoping for)...overall, it looks excellent, though there did seem to be some mistakes, on one obvious one was Breithaupt Block, and looking at that PARTS map, there was nothing there. They had hindsight. What's the worse that could happen? A major Google expansion maybe?
Some interesting stuff between Mt. Hope and Union on King...Would be wonderful if we lost that huge parking lot in DTK (it does include parking lots, plus office, retail and residential).