Lawless Anarchy in Charlottetown

CBC reports that developer Tim Banks has decided that the heritage and signage bylaws of Charlottetown don’t apply to him. Or at least that he’s going to ignore them.

That’s all very well and good for him to think, but to openly defy the law because it doesn’t meet with his personal style is arrogant and irresponsible. We as a community elect politicians to represent our interests, and those politicians have, on our behalf, developed a set of laws to protect our heritage district.

If you think the laws are flawed or if you “think behind the scenes there’s a group of people who have a belief that our city is built in the past and I think our city is built on the future,” as Mr. Banks does, then the avenue open to you is to lobby to have the laws changed, or to run for office and change them yourself.

Comments

Andrew's picture
Andrew on May 28, 2002 - 20:23

I don’t agree he should be so stubborn, he should have to follow all guide lines like any developer. However, I think the city should allow his sing. APM does allot of developing in midtown and uptown Charlottetown, but hardly ever does business downtown. If the city don’t piss him off, APM could help revitalize our downtown, and fill up some of them empity shops.

Jevon's picture
Jevon on May 28, 2002 - 20:31

As backwards as we may want to interpret it Perter: Andrew has a point.

Another point is that Banks’s shop isen’t in a Heritage Building, Does he really have to go through their council in order to have approval? He did submit a concept to City Hall, if he did submit this concept drawing with acceptable prior notice, why diden’t they enforce their own laws?

Alan's picture
Alan on May 29, 2002 - 01:58

What if the law is wrong? I don’t care one way or the other in this case…but if someone wants to get charged or sued to prove the person bringing the cahrge or suit is wrong, more power to him — that’s the personal side democracy: when the government is wrong, the individual can get them to change rather than waiting cap in hand. Waiting for legislators to meet your needs in life can be a long cold old wait. Besides, its more fun to kick the tyrant in the shins once in a while rather than begging for his attention.

Derek's picture
Derek on May 29, 2002 - 04:48

This time it’s signage, what will it be next time — impatience with regulations has led to a lot of corporate behaviour we could have done without. Also, he puts the City in an awkward position — if they approve it now, it looks like he’s proved something, even if it would have been approved if he’d applied normally. I do like the painting though.

Charlie's picture
Charlie on May 29, 2002 - 04:50

Are there really people out there who would rather have that building filled with more dollar stores? Seems to me that hanging a mural does more for the “heritage” building than the stores that were in there before. More power to Mr. Banks.

Derek's picture
Derek on May 29, 2002 - 14:41

This time it’s signage, what will it be next time — impatience with regulations has led to a lot of corporate behaviour we could have done without. Also, he puts the City in an awkward position — if they approve it now, it looks like he’s proved something, even if it would have been approved if he’d applied normally. I do like the painting though.

Kevin O's picture
Kevin O on May 30, 2002 - 20:14

Personally, I have very little concern whether or not the City clobbers or completely ignores APM over this AS LONG AS they do PRECISELY the same thing whenever someone else diddles their authority in a similar fashion. The twaddles who’ve been running Cornwall for the past dozen years have played a lot of favouritism when deciding what’s ok and what’s not following by-law breaches. Usually, if they’re afraid of you they’ll leave you alone, otherwise phuque you!

Add new comment