Council Agenda Monday, May 28, 2012 - City of St. John's

Page 2 of2
development. Otherwise, what is the value of engaging in these exercises I actually question why this was
referred to Council and to a public meeting, because this is one of those very few cases where the memo from
planning staff shows that the proposal is so divergent from the City's plan, that in theory it could have been
rejected at the staff level. Obviously there will be times, and we've seen quite a few of them in recent years,
where a new development is not consistent with the current plan, whether or not there is a local area planning
scheme. In such cases, I think it is quite valid to be flexible when a proposal is somewhat outside of the range of
what was envisioned by the Municipal Plan. In cases where there is a very strong divergence away from the plan,
however, it should be a relatively clear choice.
The best case scenario for me would be a strong degree of participation by developers in the Municipal Planning
process. That way, citizens and developers are talking together at the planning stage, rather than at loggerheads
after a proposal has been made. Historically, many developers have opted not to participate in the planning
process, because a)they don't see how it could be useful to them and b) they're used to simply trying their luck
by flicking development proposals out and seeing what will stick. Until developers buy into the process, that will
continue. The only way It will stop is if it is made clear that the City is going to stick fairly closely to the spirit, if
not always the letter, of the Plan, until the next Municipal Plan review, at which time the discussion can be
reopened.
Please feel free to pass this along to any of your colleagues.
All the best,
Sean Murray
lile://C:\Temp\notcs32C5CD\- web6048.htm 2012105/ 18