Winnipeg | 22 Granite Way | 12F | In Development

[trueviking]

“The board’s ruling also “encourages” the city and curling club to discuss a capital fund, annual property tax waiver and eliminating rent for the club as part of a long-term lease agreement.”

Like. Who the f*ck are you? Why does this board feel its place is to recommend how the city negotiates its leases. Stay in your lane former mayor of plum coulee.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by borkborkbork

Can they evict the tenant? This is absolutely absurd.

I think their lease might even be month to month. City could definitely evict them and make pickle ball courts in the building. I’d be very surprised if they don’t create resistance in any future negotiation. The city will not be bending over backwards to help them.

[pspeid]

Originally Posted by trueviking

“The board’s ruling also “encourages” the city and curling club to discuss a capital fund, annual property tax waiver and eliminating rent for the club as part of a long-term lease agreement.”

Like. Who the f*ck are you? Why does this board feel its place is to recommend how the city negotiates its leases. Stay in your lane former mayor of plum coulee.

Who are they indeed? I would add, "... and what is your relationship to the Granite board"? I don't usually want to support follow conspiracy theories, but this seems to be "old boy network" politics at it's worst. IMO the province HAS to re-visit this.

[Mr Tall Forehead]

The municipal board is a three member panel that makes decisions by consensus, so two out of three votes makes the decision.

Does anyone know which three municipal board members sat on the panel for this hearing?

[optimusREIM]

There is a compelling argument to be made, that these quasi-judicial bodies do a lot of good and are better at delivering efficient decisions when regulatory bodies are concerned. However, I find it dismaying that the government of Manitoba decided that it was not enough that it had empowered a municipality by statute to make decisions for its own good, but it also had to create a higher board to re-decide appeals. I can tell you from experience that most of these quasi-judicial bodies are the worst to deal with for starters. And though they deliver a theoretical advantage over court proceedings in terms of the amount of time required to hear and return a decision, they often make unreasonable decisions, take forever to deliver them, and do not really have to answer for these because the standard for judicial review of these decisions is near-impossible to meet, as well as court challenges having the effect of greatly delaying justice. Justice delayed is justice denied etc...

Still shaking my head over this. Yet more evidence that the administrative state in Manitoba (elsewhere too) is in rough shape.

[Wpg_Guy]

Originally Posted by Mr Tall Forehead

The municipal board is a three member panel that makes decisions by consensus, so two out of three votes makes the decision.

Does anyone know which three municipal board members sat on the panel for this hearing?

[borkborkbork]

Heritage Winnipeg's advocacy is completely off the rails.

Tugwell showed up to oppose the development of a parking lot. Here's what she testified:

"The GCC should have been consulted. Heritage Winnipeg could have been the mediator in the best interests of the citizens of Winnipeg."

This goes beyond advocacy - she's imagining a role for herself shaping these planning decisions.

"She represents the heritage community."

Okay, but she also testified that

"Affordable housing should not come at the peril of Winnipeggers who work and play at the GCC."

The employment and recreation provided by the GCC is not a heritage issue. It's clear that she has been captured by the GCC's lobby.

(I should also note the City of Winnipeg gives $40,000 a year to Heritage Winnipeg to help fund their excellent work in parking-lot preservation)

The Municipal Board gave the GCC an absolute sweetheart deal, not only guaranteeing all their existing parking at not cost, but also prohibiting the city from reducing their available parking during construction, and "encouraging" (with the force of knowing that this unappealable board of 3 will revisit the issue if the GCC is not satisfied) to move them to free rent, no taxes, and contributions to their capital fund. Oh, and Heritage Winnipeg now gets to be the "mediator", so Tugwell essentially gets empowered to figure out what's reasonable, with the parties knowing that the Municipal Board has indicated that this is what should happen (so if it doesn't, you can imagine how it will then decide any future appeals)

The Board stresses that the use of the word “adequate” in Recommendation
No. 4 meansa Parking Plan that is reasonable and negotiated in good faith by
the City and the GCC. The Board encourages the City and the GCC to find
accessible, adequate, and ongoing parking to replace any parking thatis lost,
and to ensure that parking is available during construction. It also encourages
the City and the GCC to continue discussions about such matters as the GCC
Capital Fund, waiverof annual property taxes, and zero rent as part of a long
term lease arrangement. As offered by Ms. Tugwell, the City and the GCC may
wish to engage Heritage Winnipeg as an impartial mediator to assist them in
these negotiations.

[Brick&BRT]

Yeah, this whole thing is a disgusting display of cruel, heartless entitlement. This is outrageous. Clearly the curling club is not invested in our city, nor does it care about her citizens.

[drew]

How does it work for developments getting referred to this Municipal board? Can any development get put thru this process?

Also, it's weird that the City would just accept this kind of thing. They walk around with a big stick and a big legal department that basically mean true opposition to any of their policies/rulings is impossible unless you have a ton of money ready to sink into your own legal costs (a la Andrew Marquess, although even he lost on appeal IIRC).

[borkborkbork]

I think I resent Heritage Winnipeg more in this situation. You could make the case that the GCC just has to represent the interests of its members, and whether or not it's good for the city or disproportionately costly socially, the interests of its members are to have ample free parking.

It's Heritage Winnipeg, whose funding comes almost entirely from the city and province, and who have obviously decided that "support the current GCC board getting their way on everything they want" is the best way to advocate for the preservation of the Granite building.

Heritage Winnipeg has only one full-time employee (at $90k), and it's her. They spend a third of their budget on her salary. "Heritage Winnipeg" is practically an organization that exists to employ Cindy Tugwell.

https://www.charitydata.ca/charity/h...8956572RR0001/

[ColdRain&Snow]

Originally Posted by drew

How does it work for developments getting referred to this Municipal board? Can any development get put thru this process?

Also, it's weird that the City would just accept this kind of thing. They walk around with a big stick and a big legal department that basically mean true opposition to any of their policies/rulings is impossible unless you have a ton of money ready to sink into your own legal costs (a la Andrew Marquess, although even he lost on appeal IIRC).

Yes, any project can get appealed to the municipal board. It used to only take 25 signatures but it was recently changed to 300.

The Municipal Board is an entity of the Province of Manitoba, hence why it has authority over the City of Winnipeg.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...oard-1.7354020

[ColdRain&Snow]

"As offered by Ms. Tugwell, the City and the GCC may
wish to engage Heritage Winnipeg as an impartial mediator to assist them in
these negotiations."

How the heck is Heritage Winnipeg an impartial mediator? Their director literally testified against the project. The Municipal Board is completely out to lunch.

[Mr Tall Forehead]

The municipal board never had a role in Winnipeg development applications previously. It was the Pallister government (Mr. Red Tape Cutter himself!) that brought in legislation allowing Winnipeg planning files to be referred to the municipal board.

I'm sure the thinking was that it would let their developer buddies appeal Winnipeg council decisions (denials) to an outside authority...somewhat ironic that its actually Winnipeg council approvals that are most often appealed to the municipal board by NIMBY's or in this case, entitled douchebags.

[Wpgdude]

Originally Posted by trueviking

So. The Municipal Board thinks a tenant with a month to month lease in a city owned property should have the final say on what the city can do with its own property.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...uate-9.6979385

Agreed, what a ridiculous ruling. There must be some sort of appeal ability or board oversite clause.

[cllew]

Originally Posted by Wpgdude

Agreed, what a ridiculous ruling. There must be some sort of appeal ability or board oversite clause.

As far as I am aware the Municipal board has the final say in issues like this.

Sort of like what happens when the Supreme Court of Canada makes a decision on a case before them.

I may be wrong on this but this is what I got from most of the news reports over the last few days.

[optimusREIM]

Originally Posted by cllew

As far as I am aware the Municipal board has the final say in issues like this.

Sort of like what happens when the Supreme Court of Canada makes a decision on a case before them.

I may be wrong on this but this is what I got from most of the news reports over the last few days.

You can always appeal to the courts for judicial review, but the standards for just having the court hear the case are quite difficult to meet.

[The Jabroni]

The more I read into this, the more I want to start throwing hands.

Absolutely ridiculous.

I think it's clear what needs to happen here. Given the current climate that we are all in, let alone the timing, this confirms everything that most of us has been saying all along.

It would be a SHAME that the club itself would suddenly find itself having their lease on the building be terminated, and that the board itself has been reassigned. TSK. TSK.

[Danny D Oh]

The craziest thing is the issue is how many parking spots?

There's literally a half dozen solutions to incorporate parking for the curling club in any new development.

Instead you're just left with a big honking paved surface parking lot.

You're less likely to have a wetland or greenspace protected from development than a surface parking lot in this city/province.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by optimusREIM

You can always appeal to the courts for judicial review, but the standards for just having the court hear the case are quite difficult to meet.

I’m no lawyer but it would seem that there might be property rights laws that prevent giving a lease tenant legal power over what an owner can do with their property.

[cllew]

CBC Manitoba is reporting this morning that the City of Winnipeg believes that they can can ignore municipal board ruling, and approve apartment complex next to curling club.

Story here

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...001594?cmp=rss