Dear editor:
There is an interesting feature regarding the future redevelopment plans for the former Rand Estate that needs to be emphasized, which will also help to explain the leverage Benny Marotta has over the Save Our Rand Estate and NIMBY objectors.
Two somewhat carelessly severed subdivisions were carved out of what was a larger assembled Rand parcel, which now leaves Marotta having to manage as part of the hotel proposal. Christopher Street and Weatherstone Court effectively set the precedent for carving up the Rand property.
If you think about it, what Marotta is proposing is actually of benefit to preserving the larger remaining land area as a whole entity, while eliminating the potential future risk of carving out smaller and highly irregular subdivisions.
These two (Christopher and Weatherstone) developments were not thought out well enough to incorporate future planning within these limits of the urban boundary area; these were thoughtless development errors made in the past.
An expansive and more fulsome rationale regarding this issue will be raised at the next Ontario Land Tribunal hearing by me (amongst other technical items) after the expected appeals come in subsequent to the anticipated NOTL staff and council approval recommendations fall in line with some minor development revisions, after taking into consideration all public and technical inputs and some minor site plan tweaks.
The appeal before the tribunal is coming hopefully for the last time before Marotta gets shovels in the ground and finally preserves the future of the remainder of the former Rand Estate.
See the aerial photo and map illustrating the inherently damaging effects of the two subdivision carveouts that will significantly help put the final nail in the coffin of this dispute.
Why are people allowed to occupy the carved-out land areas but not the remainder of the Rand property?
And why is the guy that’s running for lord mayor, who spoke as a delegation against Marotta telling staff and council to refuse the Ritz-Carlton application, allowed to occupy waterfront property along the Niagara River that nobody can get access to?
There is a lot of hypocrisy especially in the Old Town district of NOTL that is allowed to flourish in favour of NIMBY attitudes that kind of spoils the mood for others.
Peter Rusin
St. Davids
