Bryan Dumanski Wants Answers!

7
Korah Library Site Re-development

SaultOnline just received the following email from Bryan Dumansk, Ward 6 Candidate, who is extremely concerned about an elderly couple who are struggling through the development of the old Korah Branch Library site.

[divider]

I would like to draw your attention to the old Korah Library on Second Line West. Talk to Mr. and Mrs. Benson, an elderly couple at 14 Nichol who live right behind this new building.

Still believe in NIMBY? This couple has been threatened by the Developer and feel they were bullied and intimidated by City Staff and lawyer.

I dropped in for a visit. Mrs. Benson reports that she was warned that the only representation that they could bring to the OMB hearing was her lawyer or only one person to speak on their behalf. If that one person spoke then they would not be able to.

“WE COULD NOT AFFORD A LAWYER. WÈ WOULD HAVE HAD TO REMORTGAGE OUR HOUSE AND WOULD HAVE LOST EVERYTHING,” Mrs. Benson stated.

Meanwhile, the Developer showed up with a lawyer and 8 people from the City all in favour of the project. ” We were overwhelmed and very intimidated by the proceedure,” said Mr. Benson. Mrs. Benson said that Mayor Amaroso asked someone involved with the development if he thought that the property values of the nearby houses would depreciate in value. Assured it would not by the opinion of the man, Mrs. Benson reported that Mayor Amaroso took his word and quickly tossed the neighbourhood petition with 66 signatures into the basket. The 66 signatures on the petition represent 100% of the houses the City stipulated in a letter that they could petition.

The bias opinion of a Developer took precedent in the mind of Mayor Amaroso over the legitimate concerns of the citizens. Variances were changed to facilitate the Developer’s wants by the Building and Planning departments. I place the blame on the City planning and the powers that be. Why would a developer not take advantage of City staff that they could manipulate to maximize profit? It is the natue of the business.

The proximity of the building, its height and windows leave absolutely no privacy in the Benson house and yard. Mrs. Benson has suffered several heart attacks because of the stress endured. If this was YOUR parent’s house, what would you do? If your parents were intimidated by the City and Developer, what would you do? Is this the way we treat our senior residents? Don’t get me wrong. I am in favour of development in this City, but not at the expense of the vulnerable Average Joe. It leaves one to speculate on just who the City staff are working for. The tail is wagging the dog and you are paying for it.

Perhaps we should pay more attention to what the effects of bad planning are and not be so concerned about if we have enough election signs hanging on the security fence around the project itself. No offense to Mr. Romano but am I the only candidate who sees this? I invite EVERY councillor elect and those who voted in favour of this development to see 14 Nichol for yourselves.

The term NIMBY is a slick acronym used by people in an attempt to discredit the message and the messenger. Mrs. Benson wanted me to give out her number and address. She has opened her home and wants people, councillors and staff to come by.

She stated, “I WANT THEM TO SEE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO OUR HOME AND LIVES.”

Her number is 705-946-4936. The address again is 14 Nichol.

Here is yet another example of City staff and the powers that be bending to the all mighty dollar at the expense of the citizens.   I am ready to fight for the people of Wad 6 and anyone else in other Wards who will continue to call a Ward 6 councillor for resolve. Continue to back a fighter!

7 COMMENTS

  1. At the OMB hearing, Peter Tonazzo from the City planning department said ” the effect on property values is unknown and not a concern considered under the Planning Act.” If this is a fact, then the Planning Act needs revision, period. This is all a little dirty to me! I feel for the couple, but if kind regard for neighbours is not in the books, it needs to be. It will never happen naturally!

  2. There are municipalities that make developer purchase abutting properties for green privacy buffer zones. Sure it increases the overall cost of the project, but properties like this go for quite cheep given the acreage and potential for large units.The aesthetics would only be a plus for everyone. They tried to sell their house, but as soon as people saw their back and side yard it was a game changer. All they want is resolve.

    • I have such hard time thinking anyone would think this is a reasonable situation for this neighbour. I do believe it would affect the pocket book of the builder to do the right thing and offer to purchase their home. That could still happen right? Perhaps the City ought to look at purchasing this property. How much more efficient would SSM be if the City had to be accountable for their stupidity! I can well imagine how this has affected the neighbour. I do not think the right people are loosing sleep over this. This should bother every home owner, and frankly all Developers in this city! If people could just be a bit empathetic, and put themselves in this situation, they would see the ‘wrong’ in all of it. I think we have to do this to be a DECENT neighbour, in a decent city, with decent Developers!

    • Are you aware the specifics about what “variances were changed to facilitate the Developer’s wants by the Building and Planning departments?”

      • Julie thanks for your interest I believe the frontage was changed to make it appear that the 12 plex would have no direct effect on traffic. This is not the case. Proximity of the build was also allowed which should have been changed. as zoning was altered to facilitate the 12plex. I have the # of the lady who prepared the OMB hearing for them. She is a good contact for more info .

  3. I once owned a home where a company had already received all the approvals to operate their business, which severely interfered with the enjoyment of our property. With a very prepared meeting in our home we talked with the head of the company, at our kitchen table, who realized that buying our home for higher than fair market value was in their best interest. Otherwise their reputation would be severely tarnished in the community. They prepared the paperwork and we were able to buy a new home that did not have the same problems. They were then able to sell the property to someone who full well knew what was located beside them and was happy to buy the house. The hearing may be over but I am certain a lawyer would take this case on in a law suit, that could reflect very badly on city officials and the developer. Hopefully the developer steps up to the plate and does the right thing, otherwise if there was anything corrupt in this development, many people will be exposed. I am hopeful this will be resolved fairly for the couple.

Comments are closed.