Ongoing YYCCC (Chu + Farkas) Transgressions Threat

[Lubicon]

I have to wonder if that blockoff on 1st/18th has more to do with Peter's than anything else. Could be just a coincidence but that was our go to route home from Peters heading to Crowchild and NW. Worked out perfectly coming out from the alley behind Peters, avoiding the cluster that is 16th and shoot all the way over on 20th Ave. Used that one going to/from Henry Viney arena too all the time.

[Bunk]

https://twitter.com/cityofcalgary/st...127408642?s=20

City of Calgary
@cityofcalgary
We have heard concerns circulating about the development permit for a Dairy Queen at 1906 Centre St NE. The original building was destroyed in a fire in 2019. We empathize with the owner and franchisee in navigating a difficult situation in trying to rebuild this business. 1/5

In circumstances such as this, applicants have the ability to build a like-for-like structure to replace the original building. This is an option for any business owner in this situation. 2/5

However, the applicant proposed changes to the previous structure and site plan which included a different configuration for the drive-thru and a modest expansion of the building. This then triggered the project to be evaluated against current bylaws and policies. 3/5

The City tried to work with the applicant to align their new proposal with current City standards. They decided to proceed with their new plans, and then filed an appeal of The City’s decision with the Subdivision & Development Appeal Board (SDAB) 4/5

Upon decision of the SDAB, The City is prepared to continue to work with the applicant on this project, as we recognize the importance of small business success to the Calgary community. 5/5

[PsYcNeT]

So basically the owner tried to skirt the rules and then unleashed Corbella to win in the court of public opinion.

[Jimmy Stang]

In light of these new facts, can we all misdirect our outrage to Bunk or something? Dude deserves a paddlin' for getting in the way of some good, old fashioned, angry populism.

[Swift]

Can we be sure though that Farrell didn't burn down the DQ in 2019? I can just see her prancing around the city in the dead of night, latte in hand, torching low density buildings.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Bunk

https://twitter.com/cityofcalgary/st...127408642?s=20

City of Calgary
@cityofcalgary
We have heard concerns circulating about the development permit for a Dairy Queen at 1906 Centre St NE. The original building was destroyed in a fire in 2019. We empathize with the owner and franchisee in navigating a difficult situation in trying to rebuild this business. 1/5

In circumstances such as this, applicants have the ability to build a like-for-like structure to replace the original building. This is an option for any business owner in this situation. 2/5

However, the applicant proposed changes to the previous structure and site plan which included a different configuration for the drive-thru and a modest expansion of the building. This then triggered the project to be evaluated against current bylaws and policies. 3/5

The City tried to work with the applicant to align their new proposal with current City standards. They decided to proceed with their new plans, and then filed an appeal of The City’s decision with the Subdivision & Development Appeal Board (SDAB) 4/5

Upon decision of the SDAB, The City is prepared to continue to work with the applicant on this project, as we recognize the importance of small business success to the Calgary community. 5/5

Super helpful info Bunk!

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Development Permit is DP2020-4914 for this.

Would love to see the actual changes proposed to the building and structure to be able to form a proper take.... but I believe that's not possible with DP's (virtually anyways).

[The Yen Man]

Well, I take back what I said in light of the new information. If it was indeed a modification that required a different permit, then it's fair for the city to consider it different structure and go through that process.

I guess this isn't the first (or last time) I get whipped up into a frenzy by media reports skewing things. I better reserve further judgement till more facts come out.

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

So basically the owner tried to skirt the rules and then unleashed Corbella to win in the court of public opinion.

...bUt DruH FarReLl!1

(honestly the most frustrating thing is that it was effective. People aren't going to see the city's update, they're not going to understand the full issue, they're just going to blame it on an outgoing councillor and the latte-sipping crowd and mission accomplished -- as a city, we're further divided than we were before this whole mess. Corbella strikes again!)

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

I have to wonder if that blockoff on 1st/18th has more to do with Peter's than anything else. Could be just a coincidence but that was our go to route home from Peters heading to Crowchild and NW. Worked out perfectly coming out from the alley behind Peters, avoiding the cluster that is 16th and shoot all the way over on 20th Ave. Used that one going to/from Henry Viney arena too all the time.

The street blocks are for Balmoral Circus, to stop cut throughs on residential outside of the main streets (20th, 16th, etc), and reduce vehicle traffic on 2nd (cycle route) while still allowing some local traffic.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Torture

The street blocks are for Balmoral Circus, to stop cut throughs on residential outside of the main streets (20th, 16th, etc), and reduce vehicle traffic on 2nd (cycle route) while still allowing some local traffic.

They suck and I hate them. The one at Balmoral is the worst, because I have a habit of going that way. I turn down the street, and then you are trapped, so you have to do an Austin Powers turn. They could at least put a sign up on 20th ave. It's also silly because they have traffic lights there, and another set at 16th, almost as if this was designed to be a route for people to use. It's a gird street system, it was designed to function as such. Now they've broken that. I don't really consider it "cut through traffic", it's people using a route for it's designed purpose. They may as well get rid of the lights on 16th and 20th, as all they do now is make people burn more gas.

[lambeburger]

My opinion remains unchanged.

What's more likely, the family business playing an extremely high stakes game of brinkmanship with the city over these minor changes to the rebuild? Or the city jerking them around and being excessively onerous because a drive thru clashes with their grandiose vision for the city.

It shouldn't be a baffling ordeal to build or rebuild a burger joint. Especially not now, when we need to rebuild our economy.

[Bunk]

Taking one’s chances with the appeal board is not an uncommon tactic (remembering the actual applicant is the architect representing the landowner). It’s not that risky.

There were several avenues to getting a drive thru including in the existing condition in the old Development Permit, or through the new DP, but perhaps not their absolute ideal scenario for configuration.

Bottom line is that the narrative that the City Administration was inflexible and dogmatic, or that the owner “can’t rebuild” out of something that was no fault of their own, is just not true.

It’s easy to buy into a caricature that the bureaucracy is some callous and faceless entity, but I also just don’t think that’s all that fair either.

[lambeburger]

Perhaps the fact that so many businesses feel the need to resort to taking their chances with the appeal board is proof enough that the city is too inflexible.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by lambeburger

Perhaps the fact that so many businesses feel the need to resort to taking their chances with the appeal board is proof enough that the city is too inflexible.

Dude give it a rest

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Bunk

https://twitter.com/cityofcalgary/st...127408642?s=20

City of Calgary
@cityofcalgary
We have heard concerns circulating about the development permit for a Dairy Queen at 1906 Centre St NE. The original building was destroyed in a fire in 2019. We empathize with the owner and franchisee in navigating a difficult situation in trying to rebuild this business. 1/5

In circumstances such as this, applicants have the ability to build a like-for-like structure to replace the original building. This is an option for any business owner in this situation. 2/5

However, the applicant proposed changes to the previous structure and site plan which included a different configuration for the drive-thru and a modest expansion of the building. This then triggered the project to be evaluated against current bylaws and policies. 3/5

The City tried to work with the applicant to align their new proposal with current City standards. They decided to proceed with their new plans, and then filed an appeal of The City’s decision with the Subdivision & Development Appeal Board (SDAB) 4/5

Upon decision of the SDAB, The City is prepared to continue to work with the applicant on this project, as we recognize the importance of small business success to the Calgary community. 5/5

How do you reconcile this thread from the city about working with the applicants with the comments made by Druh Farrell in the application?

https://twitter.com/SprntgStilettos/...570667011?s=20

[Burninator]

City councilors do not approve or refuse Development Permits. Development Permits are circulated to councilors and they can provide their comments to the Development Authority (City of Calgary Planning and Development Department) if they wish. The councilors comments are only part of the permit application process. The back and forth between an applicant and the City of Calgary would be happening through the planning and development staff, not a councillor. The applicant for this permit would have gotten their refusal from the Development Authority explaining why it was refused. Druhs comments may have also been included with it.

https://www.calgary.ca/pda/pd/permit...t-process.html

[Wormius]

I think the weird thing is, whenever I have gone to a DQ, even pre-pandemic, they’re not really busy places. The idea that they need a standalone, dine-in place is bizarre.

[curves2000]

I am really shocked that some people can't seem to see certain things that in some cases, would point to outright corruption by officials in certain property related cases. I think we have a naïve way at looking at things in Canada and don't think that corruption shows up in any way in certain manners when it does.

Listen, I have zero doubt that the information from the city that the owners of the property proposed some changes which resulted in the city looking at it. They proposed "modest expansion" and a change of the drive thru. Let's analyze that for a moment, how large of an expansion are we talking about? Are they trying to make more use of the restaurant for a potential future tenant and perhaps less parking? Probably but I doubt they are going for a record on the largest DQ in Canada.

What is at stake and what will probably happen is that the city will buy out the land owner what they think is fair value at taxpayers expense. The city will than sell that land to a developer for LESS VALUE who stands to literally make multiple millions in the project. This for SURE is worth some healthy sized envelopes to the decision makers for these type of projects. Things like this happen a hell of a lot more often than people ever want to admit or even know about. Arena deals for the Flames and than reneging on deals, wanting more land for development. Just today I read a piece about taxpayers are building a parking lot on private land to benefit the Stampede Board? Where is all this money going and who's benefiting from it? Where is all this cash going that the Stampede Board generates annually from all events and facilities ?

There are a TON of projects that are stand alone buildings, in areas where developers can make an absolute killing moving onto higher density. The standard condo, office tower, street level glass retail store style. I get it, I really do. The developers make a fortune, the city get's to tax more air and collect more taxes and it creates a more livable and vibrant city in a lot of ways.

What happens when the property owners for these type of properties don't play ball? They get hit with massive property valuations and taxes because their property could theoretically become a large, dense development. The issue is it's not, it's a small book store, or a grocery store, or a gas station or a restaurant that serves the local community.

We really have this strange obsession with getting rid of the old and always in with the new hip, trendy thing in this country. What we end up doing is literally building the same garbage over and over and over. Everything looks the same. Every high rise development, every cookie cutter area, every suburban mall looking the same.

I hear from friends of mine in Toronto and Vancouver all the time about how great the development is there and all this great street art. Let's get real and be honest that the development is all the same glass office and condo towers and some decent and a lot of really ugly crap people are paying off as art.

If we traveled to other parts of the world like Europe and in Asia we would see that they do an excellent job of incorporating the old, valuable, beautiful and more in with the new. Things look good and blend in nicely and you can admire it.

So yes, I am calling this BS on this particular project out for what I am sure it is and that is skuzzy at best. Like I said, I have zero doubt that there may have been some proposed changes to the plans and that resulted in the decline of the development, minor changes at best if we are being honest. Nothing that is materially important but when a developer comes in and make a radical change for the property, that will get approved no doubt.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by curves2000

If we traveled to other parts of the world like Europe and in Asia we would see that they do an excellent job of incorporating the old, valuable, beautiful and more in with the new. Things look good and blend in nicely and you can admire it.

Can't speak so much to Asia, but for the great cities of Europe:

- their old stuff is much older and often more beautiful/culturally important than what we have in North America
- they were built and structured before the automobile existed, and already have higher density because in the old days you had to walk everywhere or maybe ride a horse

So... historical preservation there is hardly a comparable situation to refusing a permit for a replacement Dairy Queen with a drive-through.