Although off-topic, in that it isn't a discussion of xara, this message is in response to Athena and is perhaps of interest to others:
The waterfront project I illustrated had a very slow and painful death. The developer who came to my architectural firm is a very interesting fellow. He is approaching full retirement and was looking to develop a condo project where he and a few good friends could live. He'd develop it and sell units to a few buddies and they'd all live happily ever after. Of course he'd sell some other units - so he'd get his for "free". The land in question is a piece of old landfill at one edge of a very attractive town. It had no trees. It was really just a unpaved parking lot that afforded some great waterfront views to the cars that illegally parked there and to the three houses across the street.
The land is zoned "waterfront industrial". Under this zoning it could be a junk yard, a garbage recycling operation, or (if it were big enough) an oil refinery or paper mill. The town's planner advised the town council that the proposed condo development conformed to the zoning. He did so with the thought that "waterfront industrial" is probably the most wide open of zones. To put it simply, if by right you can accept a polluting pulp mill then there should be nothing stopping you from building a relatively modest high-end housing development.
The town was not a pushover. Our developer didn't give up. We had 14 public presentations before council and its planning advisory committee. The project was redesigned three times in effort to win their approval. The design I posted above was actually the first one. What was finally approved after about one year of negotiations with the town is actually very different from the illustration. I should also point out that we presented the final scheme to the town's heritage group who advise council and we received their unanimous endorsement.
After we had the town's offical "notice of intention to enter into a development agreement" there is in our municipal law an opportunity for upset citizens to appeal. Four people got together and appealed on the basis that condos shouldn't be built on waterfront industrial land. The appeal was made to a gov't appointed board charged to see that municipal councils act democratically and that they apply laws correctly. This appeals process took several months and cost both the citizens group and the town a lot of legal fees. The council had to defend its actions to the board. Our client also had significant legal costs in his efforts to assist the town with its case. Eventually the review board agreed with the town council in support of the development. We thought we would proceed to construction.
It wasn't to be! The citizens group (all four of them) appealed the board's ruling to the provincial supreme court saying both coucil and the review board were in error. After several more months and more legal costs, three (appointed) judges of the supreme court agreed with the citizens group and ended all chance of the project ever being built. Their decision cannot be appealed.
I must say although the lawyers made a pile of money in this matter, it never really came down to one side having better lawyers or a "dream team". I find it interesting that the town's lawyer who originally advised the town on the legality of the planner's interpretation of the zoning - is now our province's Minister of Justice! In the time all of this has happened, he was elected to the Legislature and his party gave the Justice portfolio.
So when I write that I was happy to have been paid you can now see that I wasn't refering to getting paid for the rendering. It was nice to get paid for the hundreds of hours put into the project. The project and the process was certainly a struggle. I truly feel very sorry for my client. (He probably can't afford to retire any more!)
Regards, Ross
<a href=http://www.designstop.com/>DesignStop.Com</a>
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks