According to my sources, my thoughts on allowing the building to go ahead — originally published on the blog on Friday — were offbase; based on the heritage district plan, you can’t build anything taller than three stories. The town can’t even issue a building permit for what Steve Assaff is proposing.
So we’re between a rock and a hard place. Leave the land in, and Assaff can’t build what he’s proposing (keeping in mind he’s already said he can’t do the same type of project as a three-storey, and make any money). Take it out, and it’s a big chunk out of the heritage district (and it is completely encircled by the district, by the way).
A solution could be to pull the property out, allow Assaff to build, and once the project is done put it back into the district — when it would then become ‘pre-existing, non-conforming’. The kicker would be that Assaff agrees to the idea (a bit of a shell game, I grant you), and that other landowners don’t suddenly line up demanding the same treatment.
But regardless… we need some out-of-box thinking on this one. On the one hand, we need the property developed, and what Assaff is proposing is a quality, impressive project that will be an outstanding gateway to the downtown. But we also need to protect the integrity of the heritage district.
Decisions, decisions…
On another note: Tonight’s council meeting — which includes a public meeting on Admiral Collingwood Place — should be a real barnburner; it starts at 4 p.m., and it’s at the Leisure Time Club in order to accommodate the anticipated crowd showing up for Admiral.
Here’s the thing: if there’s booing, or any attempt to shout down someone who’s making a legitimate presentation to council on the pros and cons of this project, I will take names. And you will be asked how booing or heckling adds to the democratic discourse, and why you felt the need to be boorish…
October 24, 2011 at 10:11 am
Heritage smeritage. Progress is all about the juxtaposition of new and old, tall and small. Keeping downtown alive means going up to an extant not out to Duntroon!
October 24, 2011 at 11:43 am
Cook, you say so much in such a few well chosen words. I couldn’t agree with you more!
So what if removing the Admiral block from the Heritage District cuts down the size of the district??? Who really cares or is effected by it? Get the project moving. Get people into the downtown. Our downtown is slowly fading away and if the economy takes another downturn that so many are predicting, there will be even more empty stores. Many merchants have still not recovered from the terrible planning of the construction. Intensification trumps Heritage. Jobs trump Heritage. Our Heritage committee does a great job but I hope they lose this one.
October 24, 2011 at 1:02 pm
Thanks for taking another look at this subject Scoop. I remember the council meeting as though it was yesterday. There was a lot of hoopla about the 36’ height restriction, but nevertheless, it was passed into LAW. And yes, why wouldn’t someone ask for the same extra three stories next month? After all, the contractor could triple his square footage; increase his monthly income and ultimately his capitalization rate should he decide to sell the property in the future. Oh, and I can’t help myself… the more square footage, the more property tax for the town. The good ol’ boys network perhaps? You might want to look at the old library building deal too. What a mess.
October 24, 2011 at 2:09 pm
If my memory serves me, the library contravenes the Heritage district’s height bylaw and there is inadequate parking for the two buildings on that property. The library is ugly pretend heritage to boot. Probably doesn’t matter because it never seems to be busy. They do however, employ a huge host of people there. I hope someone reviews each and every job at the library.
October 24, 2011 at 3:57 pm
The detail about the transaction and purchase of the ‘old library’ has scandalous whispers, the new one had its scandals, but everything worked out.
Sorry Merv, I rather like the new library. They have a reasonably capable staff; their book keeping could use some work, but they are working on it. I’m partial because I have my own reasons for liking it, so….
Walk in to the foyer, if it doesn’t take your breath away, you won’t know what I’m explaining, but I think you’ll know.
October 24, 2011 at 8:20 pm
What do people have against other people making money? Its how things get done man. More tax revenue=better services and up to date sewers etc. And yes the library is beautiful inside but on the outside its a cookie cutter butt ugly box.
October 25, 2011 at 6:42 am
If you cant handle modern…? And the old library looked like a shoe-box. Frank Lioyd Wright would be puzzled, proud and not give a crap what one person thought. Take a good look at the library and the detai.
Making money is not a bad thing, but rules are rules, our infrastructure is almost complete and services are great.
If those rules are broken for one, they should be broken for all, and then where would we be? Every builder would have a fighting chance when the economy got bad – banks/investors would be more favourable to all commercial and industrial contractors.
Remember the ‘parkway-project’ that sat abandoned for almost a decade?
October 25, 2011 at 6:55 am
Yes, three mistakes and one intentional grammatical error – typing in the dark and all.
October 24, 2011 at 8:36 pm
If we can change the rules and precedents according to what the power brokers want then what does that make us?
October 25, 2011 at 8:02 am
Thanks!
October 25, 2011 at 5:08 pm
I think in the case of Admiral Collingwood Place the power brokers are the citizens of Collingwood who voted a resounding YES to a 6 storey building. You and Kathy who both advocated for the mediated 5 stories both lost. Mr. Dupe’s petition in favour of the first design was signed by more than 2000 people. Kathy was supporeted by less than 1000 voters. I wish the people of VOTE would just get over it. You lost. The people spoke very loudly. We want Steve to build his beautiful building. Carrier, his hidden agenda and huge legal costs are now just an ugly piece of our history.
You tell me why The Admiral block should remain in the Heritage District. Rules and precedents are changed all the time to reflect changing needs. A committee drew and then redrew the boundaries for the Heritage district. Time for another redraw to reflect changed circumstances.
October 25, 2011 at 6:59 am
Heritage…..what all the talk and guidelines are about, was created without guidelines, in the style of the day. We are not @%$#ing idiots. The town will and should take on the character of those who live here, not some arbatrary matter of taste.
October 25, 2011 at 7:19 am
Yes J, we can’t have both, or can we, hmmm. Old people don’t like change. They have to realize that they are not 16 years old driving a 65 Mustang. Things change, but the rules….
October 25, 2011 at 11:47 am
I’ll forgive the condensation…The downtown is a great example of what happens when people are left to their own devises. Some of the building designs were driven by economy, and some weren’t.There are some truly beautiful examples and some that are just old building. It should be left to the discretion of the owners, what takes place. The lack of design controls promotes an interesting and a vibrate community, not a stagnant same old, same old, Walt Disney facade.
October 25, 2011 at 9:22 am
If the rules dictate we live trapped in some era that never really existed I say change them!
October 25, 2011 at 12:15 pm
Dear J:
Thanks for forgiving my condensation, but consider it ‘sun-showers.’ I’m just kidding, the sentence didn’t lose and meaning from a minor error. God knows I make oodles of them. I didn’t mean any condescension, so please don’t take it that way. Yes the property belongs to the land-owner, if you will, and any decisions should belong to him or her. Tuck-pointing is a good place to start down-town. I always used a cake-piping bag. It always saved lots of clean-up.
Yes, we do have a Disney theme on Hurontario… it’s not Main Street USA; it’s one of the main streets in Collingwood. I’ll give you that one too because most former ship builders don’t give a rats !@# about perfect appearances and pretty sidewalks, but the tourists do.
October 25, 2011 at 4:33 pm
Thanks……Anyway, I prefer a slicker…to maintain the knack. and with the knack…there is no cleanup
Best Regards,
J:
October 25, 2011 at 2:25 pm
Can we all say we want a vibrant and busy downtown where people walk to shops, church and restaurants? I’m not moving anytime soon so lets work it out man!
October 25, 2011 at 4:49 pm
I don”t see much difference between now and when Rupert’s Tower went in. After the dust had settled, the town didn’t go to hell in a handbasket, then, nor will it now…even if the Admiral where to go 14 stories
October 25, 2011 at 5:09 pm
It’s all good… not much is ever going to change the handful of people who decide EVERYTHING from taxes to design, but drawing attention to a subject (otherwise overlooked), can and will cause change. That’s it for me. Keep on keepin’ on.
October 25, 2011 at 6:23 pm
Why are some people upset, annoyed, surprised, bent out of shape because the mayor and a few councilors attended an opening party for Admiral Collingwood Place????? Sandra campaigned on supporting 6 stories. She won in a landslide. Her support of 6 stories now should hardly come as a surprise. Rick has always been supportive of 6 stories. His win was massive. People’s lives were disrupted, our town ran up huge legal bills and we all had to live with a main street pond because of the last council. This council’s mandate is crystal clear…..get the 6 storied building up and occupied. It can only bring good things to downtown. You don’t like it? Move!!!
October 25, 2011 at 8:15 pm
Let’s talk money…The amount of money the town has given back to the developer, $660,000 + parking bonuses. How about the legal fees to push this development through the zoning by-law mess, currently over $400,000 sources have said. The town itself is acting as the agent for the development so what’s a calculation on the money spent on town staff’s time? How about any of the normal development charges that Assoff has asked not to pay? Did council campaign to spend over $1 million dollars of tax payers money for this building to be built?
October 26, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Jane, the $660,000. was not tax payers’ money. It was paid by the developer to satisfy section 37 which would have allowed him to build up to 6 stories in the Heritage District. His current design provides adequate parking for both the residential and commercial components of the building. Thus he owes no cash in lieu of parking spaces and money paid by him for the parking deficit of the original design was also returned. The by law mess was created by the former council so their friends could avoid a costly OMB battle. Carrier’s motion re the development cost TAX PAYERS IN EXCESS OF HALF A MILLION DOLLARS. Carrier never campaigned on this. If he had, he would have, in my opinion, lost the election and VOTE would have lost their influence. Who are your sources who have put the $400,000 figure out there? Unless they work with Ms. Leonard or are part of council, I consider it mere hyperbole to make a point.
I’m glad council is getting things done. I’m sad I won’t be living downtown as planned. Had to purchase elsewhere. I wouldn’t vote for Carrier again ever, for anything.
October 27, 2011 at 6:41 am
Ultimately the marketplace and unit sales will decide the size and height of the building. Lots of sales, larger/higher building. Slow sales, not so big. We desperately need an anchor building at the present south end of the Heritage (business) district and have for a long time. We need the tax revenue, get on with it, in 5 years from now no one will notice the height.
October 27, 2011 at 9:44 pm
Hey Merv
Just for the record, was never a member of vote. I live just down the street and am concerned about my gardens getting the summer sun that they are used to. Healthy tomatoes are important to me!
October 29, 2011 at 10:00 am
Cheryl,
Really?? Seriously?? You live well south of the site and you’re worried about sun for your tomatoes?? Please sleep easy knowing you will still raise healthy happy tomatoes. The sun will rise every morning in the east and set every evening in the west even when 6 stories are erected at Admiral Collingwood Place. The daily path of Mr. Sun will not change because of the 6 stories. There will be no shadowing of your gardens.
October 28, 2011 at 9:46 am
Healthy tomatoes? Wow! Are they heritage tomatoes? Man thats a new argument.
October 28, 2011 at 1:55 pm
A legitimate concern indeed. I have a friend in Squamish BC. His house is surrounded by mountains and has never had direct sunlight. It’s not a good thing, but he gets to look at ‘Diamond Head’ and ‘Indian Head’ mountains all day, and Molly’s Reach is 5 min. away (big deal). I don’t imagine that he grows many vegetable/fruits there. That’s why I chose not to live there.
October 28, 2011 at 2:58 pm
What does that have to do with the current price of butter?
October 28, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Thats why I live downtown, to grow fruits and vegetables.
October 28, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Gettin’ a little deep to shovel Cook. I know It’s exciting and all, but some people are somewhat passionate about the subject. A little respect, insight and thought might be in order, if you look at the big picture. If you don’t, just keep on playing the class clown funny-man.
I don’t care one way or the other, but respect the fact that others do. Take the ‘high road.’ It’s not just about tomatoes (you say “potatoes”), it’s about the lack of democracy affecting each and every one of us in different ways. Ya’ want me ta’ spell it?
October 28, 2011 at 6:09 pm
Apparently it does need to be clearly said.
This is about the unfair treatment of a developer by the current council.
It doesn’t matter if you’re another developer, a resident being over shadowed by the completed project or any other person this effects.
You would want the Council to fairly and justly treat you in the same manner as another.
An even playing field built on good, long term, well thought out policy.
Policy should be updated and revised on the path to making things better.
What has happened here is not that.
What has happened is door wide open, pretend there is no policy, we’re just going to do this and that’s that.
The proper process would have been to acknowledge that policy may need to be changed, survey the public, hold open meetings regarding a general revamp of the current policies on downtown, amend those changes and then give the go ahead ‘if’ the new policies allowed it.
October 29, 2011 at 5:38 am
From the world headquarters, and our corner office, I can see that ugly blue water tower with the big letters, all the time. I’m hoping that The Admiral will be tall enough to block that out. According to Google Earth, The Admiral will break the line from the office to the water tower.