There's a little one who digs stuff out on occasion. I wanted to be sure of my information about the Region's decision on the Westhill Development application.
It was on the planning committee's agenda circulated in December 2007. Planning Committee approved it on January 16th 2008. It went forward to Regional Council , where it was accepted on January 24th 2008.
The Region audio tapes committee meetings. After the minutes are recorded, tapes are destroyed. All that shows in the record is the recommendation was approved.
No record of opposition exists to regional staff's recommendation by our representative at committee. There was no representation at Council, where the application received regional support.
It wasn't until it reached a Public Planning Meeting in Aurora that town staff advice was tossed. Councillor Mac Eachern wrote her own report at the table, on the hoof so-to-speak, for staff to follow.
Since then, there have been two Ontario Municipal Board and two Divisional Court Hearings. All unsuccessful in the quest for a Consolidated Board.
Three were funded by neighbours opposing the development. The town instructed a solicitor to support the neighbours' argument at our cost of course. .
The neighbours decided after the third failed attempt not to expend further resources.
The town continued with a fourth action. Again it failed.
The fifth attempt is a request for leave to appeal the fourth . We are proceeding alone.
I gather the losing side of any legal action is liable for the winners cost. We have instructed legal counsel to argue against costs.
We have a Municipal Board Hearing ahead of us .
Estimated cost for two weeks, $200ks.
A consolidated board would take six weeks. Triple the cost.
The decision in the end, as it was in the beginning, will still be in the hands of the Ontario Municipal Board.
A touch of irony. Sue Siebert, the towns retired Planning Director was called to testify on the town's behalf. Only Sue possesses the institutional memory.
Eyebrows rose and disgruntled comments muttered, when an invoice was presented for payment for professional services rendered.
Thursday 18 March 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Good for Sue Siebert! Why shouldn't she submit an invoice for services rendered?
The Westhill debacle could be THE election issue.
Good brief and this fill someone in on helped me alot in my college assignement. Thanks you as your information.
Yes, the Westhill and Integrity Commissioner debacles should be the main election issues. The complete waste of staff time and taxpayers' money!
The whole ward system debate is a red herring, introduced at this late stage to divert attention from the MorMac misdeeds and mismanagement.
Don't fall for it, Aurorans!
Post a Comment