so because neighbour would not sell(crazy on his part) the CoA went ahead and just gave approval for developer to build over it! That seems strange though. Who owns the laneway? I thought the city does so why would the resident be offered money to sell?The planner involved told me today that the neighbour filed the appeal. Last year there was a dispute between the site in question and the neighbour over the existing laneway that will be lost in the re-development. SDM apparently won in court the right to re-develop onto/ over the laneway after the neighbour would not sell after many good offers apparently to buy out the neighbour.
I hear that the OMB is so booked up with hearings this site might not get a hearing date for at least 8 months.
Such a disappointment. The buildings in question to be developed have been abandoned/ empty for a few years now.
If you look on Google Earth you will notice that it's a small weird lane that really isn't good for anything related to car parking etc. Historical use perhaps meant that at one time deliveries were backed in.
In any case, SDM tried to buy up all the buildings part of that laneway but the neighbour would have no part of it (one of the green buildings). I believe somehow a design was created with permission/ outcome from the court hearing to use the laneway in the design.
The parking garage attached to the building is half empty everyday.
I suspect that pressure from the community and BIA members may convince Phil the Pharmacist to withdraw his appeal, although he has been known to be stubborn and shrewd. Maybe he thinks he can leverage SDM for a cash payout to withdraw his appeal. That would not surprise me in the least given his reputation around here. The laneway would have been of benefit to SDM for deliveries, but c'est la vie. Hopefully SDM can expedite this meritless appeal and break ground sooner rather than later. Raccoons are nesting in the building for crying out loud.