Enfield, NS - Wednesday, September 08, 2010 Subscribe | Advertise | Privacy Policy | About Advocate | Contact | Community Links | Suggestions
Discuss on the Advocate Media Network | Share on Facebook | Printable Version | Larger text
Council grapples for CDL consensus amid policy void
Abby Cameron
This apartment building on Kali Lane will once again be a hot topic of discussion at council's July 28 meeting.

EAST HANTS: Sometimes, nice guys finish last.

Municipality of East Hants councillors discussed options available to them for dealing with a breached development agreement with Corridor Development Ltd. during their July 20 executive committee of council meeting, and feelings are mixed.

Project planner Debbie Uloth with the planning and development department presented staff’s usual approach to situations like this.

“There are no municipal regulations or policies for approaching the issue of non compliance of development agreements,” she said.

CDL has a development agreement for the construction of its 32-unit apartment building on Kali Lane in Elmsdale. The development agreement stipulated that a common room be constructed. But a 33-unit was built, never including the common room.

When Councillor Keith Rhyno pointed out the infraction during the June 23 public hearing to amend the development agreement, the public hearing was postponed until July 28’s council meeting. A representative of the developer was not at the public hearing after being told by Councillor John MacDonald his presence wasn’t necessary. MacDonald admitted he did not know at the time that the extra unit was already constructed.

Council directed staff to look into enforcement options they have available to them. Because the municipality does not have a set policy, Uloth says their options can be taken from the Municipal Goverment Act (MGA). To date, staff have tried to take a hands on and positive approach to enforcement problems.

“The municipality has taken the approach of working with the property owners,” said Uloth. “Staff would rather foster a working relationship with developers instead of an adversarial one.”

Councillor Eleanor Roulston said that isn’t always possible and the municipality should be tougher when the situation calls for it.

“It’s good to be a nice guy,” she said. “We all like to be nice guys and we all like people to like us. But I’ve been coming here for 12 years-plus now, and I kind of figured out a while back that you can’t please everyone.”

While agreeing co-operation is the preferred route with most compliance issues, it doesn’t fit all situations.

“There are situations where I agree 100 per cent that the soft approach is appropriate,” she said. “There are appropriate times when we can give a little leeway, but there are also times, if an experienced developer deliberately proceeds in a manner that is contrary to the bylaws, that it’s a conundrum.

“You do want to foster a good relationship with developers, but you don’t want to be taken advantage of. You don’t want to be seen as a place of business where you can do what you want and ask for forgiveness afterwards.”

Councillor Wayne Greene didn’t feel the nice guy role is appropriate anymore and showed his frustration.

“This still boggles my mind of how this was missed,” he said. “With the amount of development agreements and building inspections, how was this missed?”

Other councillors see it as a blatant disregard for the development agreement. Councillor Keith Rhyno said a happy medium of right and wrong has to be found.

“I think we can take an understanding approach,” he said, “but there has to be something out there that, if all else fails, here are the fines you could be faced with. Here are the consequences of your act.

“There has to be something there, or somebody is really going to take advantage of us and just do what they want because there’s nothing in here to back it up.”

Without enforcing the rules, Rhyno said this will continue to happen. He said rules aren’t made to be broken in this situation.

“Where would we be without rules and consequences? Our society wouldn’t exist, or it would be in a state of chaos the whole time,” he said. “If we take the soft approach in everything in life, I think we would be in a heap of hot water and we wouldn’t enjoy the freedoms we have today.”

The public hearing will continue at tonight’s regular meeting of council, beginning at 7:30 p.m. in council chambers at the Municipality of East Hants office in Milford.

acameron@enfieldweeklypress.com

>> Start a Discussion on the Advocate Media Network
>> Return to articles main

Follow Us On Twitter!   RSS Feed
Join our new Social Network!
The Advocate Media News Network is a place for all our loyal readers to discuss their opinions and talk about local news and events.

>> Read More
>> Visit Advocate Media News
Website Development & Design by JSS Marketing All content copyright 2010 Enfield Weekly Press. Do not use without permission.