Double standard

Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

The City of St. John’s is pretty precise about how much garbage you’re allowed to put out: “You may place up to 10 bags of garbage, each weighing 50 lbs or less, at the curb each week.”

Imagine for a moment that you’re not amenable to that particular restriction and decided to put out 27 bags instead. Would you expect the city to just pick up the bags without a word?

Or parking: there are precise rules for parking in the downtown, from paying meters to obtaining on-street parking permits to following rules about snowclearing and street widening in the winter.

Say that the city came by and plastered your neighbourhood with signs saying street widening would take place overnight, and you just didn’t feel like abiding by the parking restrictions. Would you expect your car to be where you left it in the morning, or would you expect it to be impounded?

What about your yard? Say you wanted to build a deck and the city agreed to allow you to build one that was 13 feet long. “Balderdash,” you might cry: “That won’t even hold my extended family. I’m building a 27-foot deck, and that’s the way it’s going to be.”

Except yes, there is something the city can — and will do — about your deck. And it isn’t pretty.

But how about if you want to put 27 townhouses, for argument’s sake, in a place that the neighbours maintain can only legally hold 13 properties?

Different story.

Not only will the city help you bend the rules, it will actually change them. That’s what’s happening at 12-20 Mount Cashel Rd., where a developer is preparing to cram 27 townhouses onto 1.3 acres of land (0.53 hectares).

The site will have to be rezoned — in fact, a new form of zoning is being created — to allow what the developer wants. And Monday night, a majority of councillors voted to give the developer exactly that.

You’d think the developer might be in the mood to give a little, too, being that it expected such big changes to the rules.

Neighbours are worried about crowding, traffic, building shadowing and about where snow from the townhouse parking lot will go. They’ve made suggestions, but all that is a no-go, as The Telegram reported yesterday.

“A report from city staff notes the developer was approached about removing four lots to allow space for snow storage and a small park. ‘Staff discussed this with the developer, who asserted that he would not be amenable to losing four proposed lots,’ reads the report from Ken O’Brien, the city’s chief municipal planner.”

Imagine if city staff came to discuss your new monster deck, and you informed them you simply weren’t amenable to any changes.

“Off you go, city peons.”

You might not be familiar with the concept of a city demolition order, but you would be soon.

A double standard arises when people are not treated equally.

In St. John’s, developers and ordinary citizens are clearly treated differently.  Why?

Organizations: The Telegram

Geographic location: Mount Cashel

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Accosted Development
    June 12, 2014 - 03:45

    The last days of the housing-bubble disco. Don't stop the party! Why not build a zillion towniehouses on a moose-swamp IF we cagey builders can FOOL some DUMMIES into MOVING their stupid families IN and paying for our LIFESTYLE? It is still paper-growth to banks, to RE agents and to municipalities. The Welfarygram newspaper got cash to develop this? The complainers got money? No, eh, well then, why do you then, various armchair-savant readers & writers, feel that you are being hard-done-by in this case? Same as the cabin owners of Salmonier Line and Al Chislett. Nothing like someone with money and a plan to make more, to get every poormouthed lazy knuckledragger crying for parks - ye don't even go outdoors for f----sakes!! Damn cavepeople!!!

  • mee
    June 11, 2014 - 17:24

    Density means nothing to these so called elected councillors. Re-zoning from medium density to HIGH density means nothing to these guys as long as taxes come in!! We are sing developments go up on very small pieces of land that no-one would think of touching unless they get these apartment building ie Karwood Dev. on Blackmarsh Rd. etc. Can't we leave a few green areas in this city??? Not likely money is more important let someone else worry about the snow etc., for sure the City won't worry about it.

  • JB
    June 11, 2014 - 12:36

    With City Council making decisions like this, I'm glad I live in MOUNT PEARL!!!! At least our council listens to the people it services, NOT the $$$ of developers!!

  • Anna
    June 11, 2014 - 11:18

    I am so disappointed in Councillor Ellsworth, I really thought he was going to make a difference. I knew Hann and Tilley were useless and the Mayor would go along with anything the developer has to say. This council is ruining our City all they care about is development. Nothing is scared.

    • Christopher
      June 11, 2014 - 12:53

      If you want to see who is really ruining our city....Take A Look In the Mirror.

  • guy incognito
    June 11, 2014 - 11:11

    Our council is a joke. Doc and friends enforce the rules whenever they feel like it. And takes expensive trips to Florida to waste out money...... Doc and the geriatric councilors needs to go away....they have done enough damage

  • Wallace
    June 11, 2014 - 07:51

    I hop[e they sell the condos before winter or else no one will be interested when they try to park amongst the mountains of snow piled up over there

  • Dee
    June 11, 2014 - 05:29

    I always said that if you have no money and you are just a tax payer then you don't have anyone your corner not even your councilor that we helped vote in.Now if you are a big time developer,then you got the Mayor and the councilors in your arse pocket.We are really not a far cry from these third word countries.MONEY TALKS.Council are bought.