ward3brighton.ca

The new crosswalk/sidewalk configuration at Queen Charlotte school and the new driveway into the Simmons Arena parking lot have turned out well and should improve safety. But you may have noticed the old driveway where the crosswalk is located has been barricaded, and the new driveway has a sign that says “Bus Lane Only”. Obviously this is a mistake, otherwise there’s no way for a car to access the arena parking lot. I’m surprised I haven’t had a call about this yet. It was an error by school officials who erected the sign, not the city, and it will be corrected shortly. The “Bus Lane Only” sign will be moved to the old driveway beside the school, where it belongs.

Today’s secondary editorial in The Guardian picks up on a short aside I made in my previous post; the granting of a variance for the deck on Olde Brighton Lane sets a very bad precedent, and will make enforcement of our bylaws more difficult in the future. Why bother getting a building permit if you can just go ahead with your project and get it rubber stamped by council after the fact? I’m confident this variance would not have been granted if the application had been received prior to construction. The deck extends to within one foot of the neighbouring property, where the bylaw requires almost ten feet. The rear set back is also exceeded. The residents of the area clearly opposed this. Council simply did not have the stomach to order the deck removed (or corrected) once it was in place. It’s worth pointing out The Guardian editorial is inaccurate on at least one important point:

Melanie MacDonald had requested a side-yard variance to permit a deck at her home at 15 Olde Brighton Lane. However, before the permit was granted, construction proceeded, to the objection of area residents.

MacDonald did not apply for a permit prior to beginning construction. The deck was in place for at least a month before a city planning officer noticed it and forced her to seek approval.

Received a call from a CBC reporter requesting an interview about my conflict of interest post. Possible Monday morning interview on Island Morning.

Recently I was declared by the city’s solicitor to be in a conflict of interest over a request for a variance on a property adjacent to mine. The property owner had — without a permit — built a large deck that did not comply with the minimum side and rear yard setbacks and was belatedly applying for a variance. Admittedly, I have a history with the property in question, having publicly opposed a development that took place there prior to me being elected to council. But many of my neighbours expected me to oppose the variance on their behalf.

During an orientation session at the beginning of my term, our solicitor gave us a very thorough presentation on the concept of conflicts of interest, and the various forms by which they can present themselves. On the deck variance, firstly, I was deemed to have a bias because of my past opposition to the whole development, and secondly, there was a concern that because of the proximity, the non-conforming deck may affect the value of my property and I should not stand in judgment of anything in which I may have a material interest. Fair enough. I recused myself from the discussion at Planning Board, and when it came to a vote in council I left the chamber (Planning Board’s recommendation was to deny the request, Council disagreed).

Now, I don’t intend to question the character of our provincial Minister of Transportation, and perhaps I’m not exactly comparing apples to apples, but I see some parallels in the situation he currently finds himself in. If I can assume that conflict of interest guidelines are generally universal, then Ron MacKinley can very reasonably be deemed to have a material interest in a set of traffic lights that directly abuts his large, as-yet undeveloped piece of land. And perhaps you could argue he had a bias in favor of the new intersection.

I’m not trying to score political points against Ron MacKinley, or anyone else, but in my situation with the variance, I felt hamstrung and was very disappointed that I could not represent the wishes of my neighbours who clearly opposed the variance (I also believe this variance, which was ultimately granted, sets a very bad precedent). MacKinley probably just thought he was doing his job.

There have been a number of conflicts declared by various councillors since I began my term, some more tenuous than others. Councillors are always disappointed when they cannot represent their constituents, but we accept the old maxim, “justice must not only be done, but seen to be done”. I was disappointed in my case, but happy to step back and remove the possibility of someone applying the “sniff test” after the fact. When the provincial Conflict of Interest Commissioner reports back to the legislature, Ron MacKinley may be wishing he’d stepped back as well.

Interesting sidenote: The same developer is involved in both cases; my deck variance issue, and MacKinley’s Cornwall intersection (and also the Winslow intersection issue, in today’s Guardian).

Now that upgrades to the “Peter Pan” intersection have been completed — and considering the fact that the Trans-Canada Highway officially bypasses Charlottetown altogether via the arterial highway — a public consultation was held today to rename the stretch of the old “Trans-Canada Highway” from the Maypoint/Upton road to the the new intersection at the end of University Ave. A small group of business owners, local residents, and other interested parties were in attendance.

Understandably, there is a lot of confusion caused by the current situation. Tourists are getting lost, mail is being delivered incorrectly to duplicate addresses, emergency services have responded to the wrong address, etc. An option to do nothing, i.e. do not rename the road, was quickly dismissed.

A long list of names that had been put forward in previous discussions on this topic was presented. Some names of longstanding area residents were removed from the list because no one was present to make a case for them. In the end, after much discussion, the list was narrowed down to four options; two “generic” names, and two names of individuals that were pitched by their children.

1. Colonel McCormack
2. Etta’s Way
3. Capital
4. University (West)

(a designation of road, avenue, drive, etc, is also to be determined)

A recommendation will be forwarded to council for our November 12th meeting. Business owners felt it was important to make a decision as soon as possible, as much of the tourism material for next year will be going to print within the next month or two and they did not want to suffer another season of their guests and customers being lead astray.

Received an email with UPPERCASE SUBJECT LINE, demanding to know if councillors really believe we deserve a raise.

Tyler Richardson, an organizer for the 2009 Canada Summer Games, presented options at a public meeting on October 5th for adding two additional tennis courts in Victoria Park in order to achieve the minimum eight required for the Games’ tennis venue. In the end, both options as presented were fairly universally rejected — for various reasons — by the crowd in attendance. A commitment was made to go back to the drawing board and consider some of the many good suggestions that were made. Thanks to Nigel Armstrong from the Guardian for capturing the event on video.

Recieved a call this evening from a resident concerned about off leash dogs at Queen Elizabeth Park.

At last night’s council meeting I brought up the issue of University Avenue, specifically the intersection at the UPEI entrance and Brown’s Court. I travel in that area regularly as I’m currently working on site at Holland College Royalty Centre and I’ve been amazed at the now common site of bumper to bumper traffic lined up to the north all the way to the Charlottetown Mall and beyond. I’m assuming part of the “problem” is the re-designed intersection at the Peter Pan corner allowing for more effecient flow of incoming traffic from the Winsloe and West Royalty directions. This is a good problem to have; however, the bottleneck at UPEI is caused by the almost constant flow of students on foot crossing University Avenue. There are now so many students living in the apartments on the other side of University Avenue that the volume of pedestrians is virtually constant for a large part of the day. The crosswalk button is pressed so often the light doesn’t stay green long enough for efficient flow of traffic. I believe an underpass would be an ideal solution, and I stated this in council. Of course, the lights would still be required to manage vehicle traffic exiting the university and Brown’s court but it would take the pedestrians out of the equation (and hopefully convince some of the students who dash dangerously across four lanes of traffic to take the safe route). The biggest obstacle, as always, is cost — which I also acknowledged. The chair of Public Works assured me they are aware of the issue and are working on possible options to improve the situation.

What would you suggest?

This is always a great event in Ward 3, with an incredible turnout from all over the city. Come one, come all!

All are invited to West Kent School, Viceroy Avenue, Charlottetown for a Fall Fair on Saturday, October 27, 2007 10:00am – 1:00pm.

This free admission event is open to the public and has something for everyone!

Events include: silent auction, carnival games, thrill room, bake sale & cake walk, toy & book sale, crafts for kids, cookie decorating, tattoo art & face painting, gift basket raffle & BBQ lunch.

All of city council was just copied on a recreational hockey team’s intra-team email, which reads in part:

Sorry to say that in light of the “beer ban“, I will not be playing in the
Confederation League this year. A guys gotta stick to his principles.

Council voted unanimously on this issue. We are not the first, and surely not the last, municipality to introduce this type of policy. When Charlottetown made national headlines with this issue last month, Nicole Vanbergen, a “spokeswoman for the Ottawa-based Canadian Adult Recreation Hockey Association, said she isn’t aware of any bans on drinking in hockey dressing rooms”. The City of Ottawa promptly replied with a letter to Vanbergen, CC’d to Charlottetown city staff, outlining their policy which strictly prohibits drinking in dressing rooms and other public places. Charlottetown’s manager of Parks & Recreation was also approached by a number of peers from other municipalities at a national conference who indicated they had similar policies in place. In this day and age, with our increasingly litigious society and skyrocketing insurance rates, the city really had no choice.

Receiving a steady stream of emails regarding negotiations for another mega-concert in 2008.

Call from a businessman lobbying for a vote in favour of a project he has in the works. A rezoning would be required.

Received an email from a parent concerned about safety at West Kent School. I have heard several similar concerns and will be pursuing with school officials.

Pursuant to the pertinent sections of the Victoria Park Bylaw, a Public Meeting will be held to hear a presentation by the Host Society for the 2009 Canada Games for the use of Victoria Park for the hosting of one or more events. The presentation will include an overview of renovations to the Memorial Field as well as a proposal to expand the existing tennis courts.

WHEN: Thursday, October 4th, 7:00pm
WHERE: Rodd Charlottetown Hotel

I think there will be a good turnout for this meeting. The more the merrier!