Arts & Life
Canstar Community News
Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 17/9/2018 (661 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
A judge will decide whether a contentious plan for a high density transit oriented development in the Parker lands will go to a public hearing at City Hall.
Gem Equities, owner of 47 acres in the Parker lands, submitted an application to the Court of Queen’s Bench to compel the City of Winnipeg’s City Centre community committee to consider development applications at a public meeting on Nov. 13.
Dave Hill, the lawyer representing Gem Equities in court, said hearings concluded on Sept. 10 and Justice Candace Grammond reserved her decision to a later date.
Earlier this month, the standing policy committee on property, development, heritage and downtown development unanimously rejected an application by Gem Equities to give a first reading of its secondary plan for the 133 acres east of Waverley Street and south of the CN Letellier rail line, encompassing the future bus rapid transit corridor. The secondary plan outlines how development will occur on the land based on the City’s OurWinnpeg and Complete Communities policies.
Gem Equities is planning to build a mixed-use residential development along the future bus rapid transit corridor that will have about 1,900 units when complete. About two acres are set aside for small pocket parks and community park space.
John Kiernan, the City’s director of planning, property, and development, told the committee the secondary plan contained a number of issues that needed to be resolved before the department could support the plan.
"The department and the public service at this time see a substantial number of required changes before we would be comfortable with recommending that this plan move to first reading," Kiernan said. "We’re not saying that the (proponent) be rejected but that we work with the applicant to be able to amend the plan to address issues and concerns."
According to the administrative report, the plan was criticized because it lacks clear direction on how development should occur, applies an "incorrect (transit oriented development) type" in the plan area, lacks detail to evaluate future proposals, permits industrial and high density residential use, and does not protect a clearly defined portion of the remaining forest on site.
The committee concurred in the public service’s recommendation to allow the developer to amend the plan, in consultation with the public works department, without having to submit a new application and pay the associated fees.
Andrew Marquess, owner of Gem Equities, and consultants working on the project did not appear at the Sept. 4 meeting, citing the court proceedings that were ongoing at the time.
Marquess declined to offer a comment on the committee’s decision or say whether Gem would cooperate with the department to make changes, and referred to a media statement issued prior to the meeting.
The statement said affidavits being considered by the court suggest city administration has been secretive, uncommunicative and non-consultative on the Parker land proposal and that the administrative report is "filled with exaggerations and inaccuracies and casts aspersions on the well-respected multi-disciplinary team of professionals from across Canada working on this project."
Danielle Da Silva
Danielle Da Silva is a general assignment reporter.
Your support has enabled us to provide free access to stories about COVID-19 because we believe everyone deserves trusted and critical information during the pandemic.
Our readership has contributed additional funding to give Free Press online subscriptions to those that can’t afford one in these extraordinary times — giving new readers the opportunity to see beyond the headlines and connect with other stories about their community.
To those who have made donations, thank you.
To those able to give and share our journalism with others, please Pay it Forward.
The Free Press has shared COVID-19 stories free of charge because we believe everyone deserves access to trusted and critical information during the pandemic.
While we stand by this decision, it has undoubtedly affected our bottom line.
After nearly 150 years of reporting on our city, we don’t want to stop any time soon. With your support, we’ll be able to forge ahead with our journalistic mission.
If you believe in an independent, transparent, and democratic press, please consider subscribing today.
We understand that some readers cannot afford a subscription during these difficult times and invite them to apply for a free digital subscription through our Pay it Forward program.