I hope Don isn't right
There is a nasty discussion going on about a proposed development that sums up everything that is wrong with the planning and approval process as currently designed.
The old curling club building, on Queen St., that for years has housed a procession of auto repair shops is now going to be torn down and a developer proposes to build (what else?) condos. The problem is that this is a small site and in order to maximize his profit he needs to build five stories high. In an area where there is only one other five storey building, the norm is three, this will be a high one. Not only that the building will be abutting two popular bars and grills. The owner of the nearest, the Oasis Bar and Grill, is predicting that if the building goes ahead and is built during the next two summers he will be out of business. Unfortunately if he survives the building period that will only be the start of his troubles. The new owners of the condos won't be long in complaining about the mirth and merriment on tap. Those corrosive complaints will put to shame the nasty complaint process seen recently from the 'Baystreeters' about noise in the Victoria Park. Neighbours will complain about anything they can, witness the complaints the Marina receives regularly about its noisy lawnmowers.
Where does the problem lie at the moment? On Council's doorstep. The committee of the whole approved the application 4-3 with the Mayor obviously casting the deciding vote. While the Official Plan calls for progress that progress must be balanced with the uses of the existing neighbourhood. Obviously the two uses here - a quiet residential domicle and outdoor music on a busy patio will clash. Council for its own sake - does it want to be the referee of noise for the foreseeable future - should declare the two uses incompatible and come down on the side of common sense and limit the building to three storeys with sound barriers or not allow it to be built citing incompatibility.
17 comments:
Kinda like the people on University Ave. complaining about noise from the bandshell.
I've always loathed the "sky is falling" attitude of small business owners. It seems that if there is ever any proposed change, they are convinced that the net result will be the closure of their business. The Oasis has been around long enough and done a tidy business. They will survive.
Why can't these places co-exist? First, there are many other cities with mixed residential and commercial properties that do just fine. In fact, there are residential units on King Street even closer to the Oasis than the proposed devlopment would be.
Yes, the Oasis can get loud on a weekend night. Face facts though, in the summer when the patio is at its busiest the condo owners will have their windows shut and A/C cranked or they'd be welcome to join the revelry at the bar.
I'd be complaining a helluva of a lot more if I lived next to the bandshell!!
The structures facing King Street are three stories high, however, each story is higher than the stories of the proposed condol five. The five story condo is no higher than the three story retail/apt facing King.
The developer shaved off two condo units from the top floor at the north end. The effect of this was then tested and the condo now no longer casts a shadow on Oasis. The developer also increased street parking from two vehicles to five vehicles. The condo will have two layers of parking underground.
No doubt the Oasis owner will have a challenge for two years; it may feel existential to him, however, with some new thinking, imagination and will, the new owner will have to adjust to life, like all of us.
I know personally that the Heritage Committee/LACAC whatever you want to call them, has been desperately trying to save that building for months now :-(
I think this is a HORRIBLE idea.
Don't forget that horrific ice rink that no one will use and will be a drain on our society...
But wait... will the people moving into said condo's be some kind of super human who neither eats nor drinks?
Anonymous #593847 has it exactly right. The reason that Cobourg's downtown is thriving right now has a lot to do with moving people into the general area. The condos at the harbour put people within walking distance of pubs/restos/retail and that is ALWAYS a good thing.
Maybe Mr. Owen should be looking at the future residents of the building as customers not antagonists.
Finely I can agree with something that Mr Keeler has to say on this blog. The new building if it is build, will have people living downtown who may be able to afford to eat downtown.
it would be interesting to dig up the record of proceedings that eventually granted permission for a "bar patio" in its current location. There may be some useful references, restrictions and comments in it specific to the operation of that patio that could have some bearing on this application as well. This is not a new issue or problem.
As for the concerns about going out of business, it sounds just a bit farfetched and is predicated on the assumption that all the summer business from the patio will be lost, not a credible assumption.
As far as the noise factor goes, the condo buyers beside the frink were informed about noise issues in their purchase agreements, or so it is reputed to be the case. The same could be done here so that set maximums for levels of disturbance are included in these condo purchase agreements.
And then there's all that kid noise coming from the Y-pool across the Post Office parking lot; just may have to shut that down too! It just gets more absurd, the further you take it.
If you want to live downtown, there are things that are a part of that experience and when you buy, you sign on for that full experience, period.
However, to cover the town's butt in this case and all future ones of this kind, the developer should be the go-to one, in PERPETUITY, for the condo owners when they have a complaint. That condition should also be guaranteed through a posted bond, in case the developer takes a walk or dive or restructures at some point in the next 25 years or so. It's a sign of good faith by the developer, in their own work and product. Too often they take the proceeds and disappear, leaving it to the town to deal with the crap that hit's the fan sooner or later.
I am not following something - currently there are numerous residents who live above the businesses on the south side of King. These people have lived there long before the Oasis even existed. Do they complain about the noise?
People also now own condo's butting up against the patio at Kelly's - also a loud place on a Friday/Saturday night, with many more patrons than the Oasis, and going much later. Has there been an influx of angry calls and complaints - none that I have read about.
Also, Kelly's seems to have survived the building process (which ran through a summer I am sure), why is the Oasis unable to survive?
Successful downtown cores mix commercial and residential use together. It is not as if the purchasers of these condos will be shocked to learn that the Oasis is in their backyard, any half-intelligent buyer would be aware of this.
As for construction and noise, why not work collaboratively with the developer regarding the usual 2 hour lunch rush at the Oasis in terms of noise. It is a couple of months of inconvenience, that really only impacts a couple of hours a day. I am doubtful that construction would go all evening, when the food and liquor and higher price tag operations are flowing well at the Oasis!
You gotta admire Don Owen for chutzpa. He complains about potential construction noise, parking etc from a new condo on a nearby street. But surely the construction won't be happening at night? And if so, what about the late night music from his patio using Queen Street as an echo chamber? And while the condo has to provide parking spaces on its own property, what parking spaces is Mr. Owen providing for his customers? This synthetic outrage reminds me of the fit he threw when the Province approved (horrors) of bringing your own bottle of wine to restaurants. A $20 corkage fee nipped that nonsense in the bud.
Seems to me that plenty of folks in town have had issues with noise for years now.
The first flap I recall led to the silencing of our fog horn at the lighthouse at least 30 years ago, probably more. The horn was a long, low, mournful bleat that everybody within town limits could hear, and some people didn't care for it. Since they could bleat even louder than the horn, it had to go, and it did.
Like the slicening of the train whistles, residents chose their own convenience over proven safety mechanisms.
As to the Oasis, their patio location was once my back yard when I lived in an apartment upstairs over what was first an insurance office, then Tradewinds bulk food store and eventually the restaurant.
My partner built a wooden fence all around the yard to give us and the other tenant some private green space where we planted a vegetable garden and enjoyed BBQing and socializing in peace. It was the last bastion of green surrounded by parking lots and we treasured it.
Late at night we had to contend with patrons of the Chateau Hotel who would enter the yard through the gate at King Street. They too were looking for privacy, usually to satisfy their spontaneous sexual urges, but often to wage furious arguments too. We heard it all, and often. Sometimes the Hotel had bands and we got to listen to them free until closing time.
We didn't really care for the noise with young kids at home, but it never occured to us to try and shut the Chateau down either. When you live in an urban location, you accept that noise is part of the deal.
Another commenter made the point that there is already lots of noise coming from both the Oasis and MacGregor's pub at night, and so far, people have just lived with it. Odds are that new residents, even of condos, will learn that same lesson.
On the other hand, a five storey building in that tiny lot seems a bit much to this old timer. It will be too high for the neighbourhood, and for that reason I oppose it unless it's scaled down. With 3 instead of 5 floors I'm all for it and wish the project well.
"and so far, people have just lived with it. Odds are that new residents, even of condos, will learn that same lesson."
The other lesson that's been learned by some is the one that if you move in next to a scrap yard that's been there since the area was a field (and sat there all by itself), and then complain loud and long enough about industrial activity in a residential area, you can get the chickenshit politicians to force the scrapyard to move into someone else's backyard.
The lesson - complain loud and hard enough and you can wreak havoc through selfish actions and the rest be damned.
Deb O said, "It will be too high for the neighbourhood
How so?
Money talks, BS walks... He will get quiet Mr. Crabby.
I wish the foghorn could have stayed. It is part of the character of a beach town and a harbour town. This is heritage. I hear the foghorn when I go to Camden and other ports. Fog is part of a special ambiance in a port.
I see that people are loud here, louder than elsewhere, this is a fact. If you don't travel, you can't compare.
Post a Comment