innsertnamehere said:
It seems like the plan is similar to what Amazon is building in Barrhaven right now. That one is a 2.7 million square foot, 5 storey warehouse. It's also nearing completion right now.

If it weren't on a provincial wetland, it would actually be a great project as it's much, much more land efficient than most warehouse facilities. The 1.5 million SF Canadian Tire warehouse in Bolton sits on 69 hectares, while the 2.7 million square foot Barrhaven Amazon facility sits on 26 hectares (about 5x denser than Canadian Tire.. which makes sense since it's 5 floors vs. 1.)!
Click to expand...

I don't know if I can ever get behind anything Amazon as a great project; but I certainly approve of a more efficient warehouse concept, just not on environmentally significant land.

What's intriguing to note, is that the alternative site is currently a golf course.

That site apparently has the blessing of the TRCA.

I'm going to have to dig up the site plan for that one.
 
Northern Light said:
I don't know if I can ever get behind anything Amazon as a great project; but I certainly approve of a more efficient warehouse concept, just not on environmentally significant land.

What's intriguing to note, is that the alternative site is currently a golf course.

That site apparently has the blessing of the TRCA.

I'm going to have to dig up the site plan for that one.
Click to expand...
events.ajax.ca/Meetings/Detail/2021-02-11-1330-Special-Council-Meeting/dca9c8ec-3902-4b33-b181-accb00dd80c5

It's in this document. The CBC article has a link to it. I agree that the Ajax location would be better.. but I understand why Pickering is pushing for this side of the border. These kinds of facilities would pay a ridiculous amount of property taxes as industrial has the highest tax rates in most municipalities. A 4 million square foot Amazon Warehouse would pay probably north of 10 million a year in property tax.
 
innsertnamehere said:
events.ajax.ca/Meetings/Detail/2021-02-11-1330-Special-Council-Meeting/dca9c8ec-3902-4b33-b181-accb00dd80c5

It's in this document. The CBC article has a link to it. I agree that the Ajax location would be better.. but I understand why Pickering is pushing for this side of the border. These kinds of facilities would pay a ridiculous amount of property taxes as industrial has the highest tax rates in most municipalities. A 4 million square foot Amazon Warehouse would pay probably north of 10 million a year in property tax.
Click to expand...

An excellent argument for amalgamating Pickering and Ajax! They can share the windfall.

A windfall that includes 48M in development charges.
 
The Ajax site is offering a substantial chunk of land to the TRCA/Ajax for Environmental protection and restoration. (just over 28 acres net increase)

As per the graphic below, from the link supplied by @innsertnamehere

1615390643001.png


1615390828197.png

1615390879889.png


1615390909322.png
 
The hearing is underway now at the TRCA.

The link is hear to the Live Stream: https://pub-trca.escribemeetings.com/VideoStream.aspx?MeetingId=b1aa9b45-bf1a-42cc-bb82-ada24c134e6f

So far I'm reminded why I hate public meetings, even when the public doesn't speak.

Staff are doing fine.

But some pols on the TRCA Board are more than a bit slow on the uptake.

For the life of me, why they don't understand pick up the phone and clarify things before speaking publicly on the record...............

SMH

****

The applicant certainly isn't withdrawing anything.

****

But in what is a truly bizarre concept of process, the applicant's rep has sent an email to TRCA staff, WHILE they are in the hearing, attempting to negotiate details of the permit.
 
FFS...............while the hearing is going on...........


1615577673392.png


From the above: (attributed to Mr. Clark)

1615577701534.png
 
It almost seems like this whole exercise was about trolling the environmentally "woke" for shock value because they can. Like eating steak in front of your vegan "friends" to prove a counter point.

It's a dreadful way to run government no matter what the leadership's views or opinions are if this being the case. In the end, stuff like this seems to invariably backfire and in humiliating ways.
 
The land is still under MZO, and the TRCA has (very reluctantly) approved of its development.

The only way this ‘ends’ is if the permit is withdrawn.
 
This aside, the entire overuse of MZOs frustrates me. The provincial government should not be using this willy-nilly.

I am very sympathetic to the argument that the planning process is too slow, too opaque, and that we don’t approve housing fast enough for the people who currently live here or want to move here. The solution would seem to be to for Steve Clark to force municipalities to overhaul their planning processes and to get larger cities to radically increase minimum density across the board. That would be a much better, more effective long-term win, no?

Instead, no one wants to touch the sacred cow of low-density, single-family housing and we get stupid spot rezonings that open the government up to accusations of corruption.
 
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...ilerss&cmp=newsletter_CBC Toronto_1642_251346

Wetland that Amazon considered for warehouse safe from destruction — for now​

Developer's commitment not to damage Pickering site only lasts until court rules on legality of MZO​

CBC News · Posted: Mar 15, 2021 1:55 PM ET | Last Updated: March 15
Roughly half of this property in Pickering, owned by Triple Group, is classed as a protected wetland. If approved for development, commercial real estate analysts say it would skyrocket in value, potentially to more than $100 million.

A developer's promise not to damage the Duffins Creek wetland in Pickering is now legally binding, after the plan was presented Monday to an Ontario court.

That protection, however, is not permanent. It depends on the outcome of a court case in which the Ford government is fighting for its right to fast-track development on protected sites such as wetlands.

Pickering Developments, part of the Triple Group of Companies, signed a court undertaking Monday that it will not "harmfully alter, destroy, damage or interfere with" natural heritage features such as wetlands and wildlife habitat on the property, located just off Highway 401, east of Brock Road.

The commitment is only valid pending a court case that would take place sometime after late May.

Two environmental groups have asked for a judicial review of the Ford government's move to issue a ministerial zoning order (MZO) for the property. The groups, Environmental Defence and Ontario Nature, argue the government acted illegally because of the site's designation as a provincially significant wetland.

…more at the link at top.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top