Discussions

So the issue here concerns adding a turning lane (off 18th) into the new development? I must be misunderstanding something.  
 
As much as I dislike this kind of sprawl, it strikes me that going in off of 18th seems necessary, since funneling everyone down Patricia first would be an idiotic nightmare. While I don't like the idea of degrading a wetland either, this shopping complex isn't exactly going to be helping with retaining the wetlands.  
 
I guess I'm just confused, is all.  
 
Edited by Simonwalcal, 2022-10-11 09:20:36

Is there a drawing showing what the plan is?

Given concern over wetland loss and ongoing work to enhance , restore and protect wetlands in recent history why on earth is a development or any building work allowed to go ahead that threatens, destroys or degrades wetland habitat.

Let's face it the city is going to expand in every direction and development will occur on all land available regardless of constraints like wetlands. This is the way every city works a few cat tails shouldn't stand in the way.

 
 
Edited by bigmoe, 2022-10-11 17:48:16

I thought we were supposed to be protecting and restoring wetland habitat, not destroying it further.

I'm curious what evidence there is to suggest that we require another road here. Why aren't we constructing new homes and developments in a more mindful way? Rather than just crushing and destroying land that doesn't need to be?

I'm more than a little concerned about this development. We don't have the fire and ambulance service to look after this. They can't handle what we do have.

This is just my personal opinion, but I read this article as a top provincial politician going against the saftey recommendations of his department on his own to possibly curry favour (aka: suck up) to a well known large development group in the Brandon area who supports the party, therefore possibly avoiding the political pressure if he advised against developer's wishes. The developer has been seeking this street access unsuccessfully since 2016 and now it's approved single handedly by the Manitoba Infrastructure Minister, over-riding his own department officials.  
 
More accountability and analyzing should be the status quo. What is allowing local, large developers to not contribute more to the local community, increased infrastructure contribution therefore relieving the tax base somewhat (public taxpayers)?  
 
As the article states, the development has been a source of contention among Brandon ratepayers, as it's one reason that (allegedly along with future growth) that the City needs the 30 million debenture for wastewater upgrades and a double digit rate increase in our water rates annually.  
 
I know the OP posted a link above. I hope people read it fully as well as other more recent ones to get a complete picture.  
 
Today (October 12/22)  
 
https://www.brandonsun.com/local/2022/10/12/piwniuk-defends-access-road-approval

I think the development in that area and future areas are much needed in Brandon. I agree with the province that the city needs to grow, create jobs etc.. having said that this particular area has been an issue long before this development was in the picture.  
 
The speed itself has a lot to do with it, along with it being a single road in each direction. The province and city needs to consider making the speed 50km/h from south of the Landmark cinemas traffic light to highway 110 (vice-versa) vs 80km/h. Everyday there are tons of drivers speeding past 80km/h.  
 
Second is that the road heading both north and south should be paved to double lane from highway 110. There should also be a traffic light at 18th and Patricia, and I know the proposed area to enter that commercial development will have a traffic light off of 18th street as well. There should also be a dedicated left turn for those turning left off of 18th.  
 
Here is a video on youtube site for city of brandon meeting held August 15,22. Skip the Video to 1hr:10mns.  
 
https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofBrandonMB/videos  
 
Edited by Iceman69, 2022-10-12 17:59:32

https://www.collierscanada.com/en-ca/properties/commercial-development-site-in-brandon-manitoba/can-south-brandon-village-brandon-manitoba-canada/can2001017  
 
http://www.vbjdevelopments.ca/south-brandon-village/residential-3/  
 
These are a couple of drawing of the proposed development. To have this take this long to come to an agreement of proposed access to the land ridiculous.  
 
The reason for the councilors wanting public hearing is to make it more clear to citizens how development charges will pay for the sewer and water infrastructure to support current developments in the south end and this development as well. Council was told only 8 months ago that the cost would be 15 million now it is 30 million. That info from my understanding was from the city administration.  
 
Right now, the developers of current residential developments in the southwest corner are having issues with approved homes being built with sewer and water. The city cannot approve any more development of land in that area as there is not services support it. That land has been in the city limits for years!  
 
This process for this development is 7 years in the making and is long overdue. When city administration recommended, and city council unanimously voted in favor of expropriation of this land into the city they basically agreed to offer services to it. The cost would have been much less if it was done 3 or 4 years ago. In my opinion the delays have cost the taxpayers million.

https://brandon.ca/what-is-happening-in-your-neighbourhood/active-projects/annexation

Also why has the city not gone to the province to ask for money ?  
Why is it thrown to the taxpayers to support this and have our water bill 3x times higher than it currently is.  
 
Also maybe the developers or the current land owners should be paying a good portion of this.. even if they have to disperse the expanses to the selling of future lots.

We were taught over 30 years ago as part of high school geography that urban sprawl and development creates massive environmental destruction, habitat loss and increases pollution .  
It seems to me that in 30 years as urban conurbations continue to grow, we haven’t learned a hell of a lot and our future is pretty bleak.

Good question on why province is not kicking in?  
 
As to your second question to my knowledge the developer does pay for all the infrastructure on the land and the development fees, they pay to the city offset the portion of the cost of infrastructure to supply sewer and water ect to the land.

The general population does not even know about this 30 million project that the city needs to do.  
 
Then when people start getting their water bill and its 3x higher, the will come on ebrandon anf make a post about why their water bill is soo high.  
 
People need to start grilling their counsellors and ask why the city isnt going to the province for money!?!? If the city dont ask, they will never know.

City administration should have been seeking funds from all levels of government as soon as they knew capacity was getting to 80% capacity. If there is money coming or is part of this expansion it would be good for them to indicate it to the citizens and council. I am not aware of any type of announcement to date but would be happy to be wrong.  
 
The general public doesn't care until it hits their pocketbooks and then it is too late. If council allowed these so-called informational meetings to be conducted like any council meeting that many help. At least the questions and inform would be recorded and videoed for reference by the citizens and the press. This will not hinder the engagement of the public if council believe that they really want citizen engagement.

It’s a slough that has been being filled in for 15 years. Minimal or trivial ecological value.  
Based on the layout the access should have been approved. Highways never wants access

Not sure why the city isn't taking greater measures to improve the infrastructure and land that it already has at its disposal. I've seen enough sprawling suburban hellscapes to last me my entire lifetime. Developments like this are near impossible to navigate unless you're in a car. City planners need to do much better.

If you can direct us to the information on the level of support the province and federal government is putting into these projects that would be great.  
 
The one number we will never know is how much more we as taxpayers are going to need to pay when these projects are done vs if they had been done 3 plus years ago.  
 
If you listen to this city council meeting on you tube at the 1 hr 30 minutes, it will give lots of good info. At 2 hrs 7 minutes you will hear from the owners of the land that is part of the decision of the province re access. Do you sense a degree of frustration? How much money do you think all this work cost? Very eye-opening.  
 

What infrastructure and land are you referring to? How could city planners do better?  
 
The city council approved these lands in the south be brought into the city. Based on the development that needs access the vice president of the landowner indicated it has 50% of the commercial building ready to sign contracts today if they can get services to that land today.  
 
Listen to the video at the 2hr 7 minutes. at 2 hrs and 18 minutes you hear the issues that the city does not have a clear plan based on his opinion. This company does not talk about doing projects and development they actually get things done. Take a look around the city who has developed most of the land??

To be honest, this city has failed in a lot of areas as far as design and even upkeep.  
 
Another sore spot is the Keystone grounds. Areas of that property sit empty 99% of the time, when they can develop that in something that can generate tax money. But everyone are "tree huggers" and green space this and that. I am sorry but green space within the city that is owned by the city doesn't create any significant or any tax revenue. But lets put recycling bins in there that people abuse by putting oversized items in that aren't even recyclable.  
 
Second, once this new development goes underway and what rumor has it or even proposed that a new Canadian Tire being built there. What will Shindico (leaser) do for the former Canadian Tire store? Is it gonna sit empty like the old Sobeys and be another eyesore?

Given concerns about pollution and congestion caused by transport, city planners should now work with the aim to eliminate the use of private transportation within city limits and explore alternatives or improved provision of public transport. Further , future development of greenfield sites and urban expansion or sprawl needs to stop. It’s called leadership. It’s time for politicians to make meaningful change. Improved and modernized urban planning is the perfect opportunity.

Based on this map there is little or no close assess for people that live in the south west and south east to mass transit.  
 
The big issues with developing within the current city boundaries is the infrastructure is very old and in many cases past due for upgrading.  
 
Here is an example. One has to question the impact of 29 plus residential units' and commercial tenant like that at 18th and Princess. Prior to the redevelopment it had 4 houses on it that were over 70 years old. How old do you think the infrastructure is that gets sewer and water to that address? What impact does a building and concrete parking lot have on the city infrastructure on the attached streets? What impact does density of 8 times plus have on the infrastructure that in many cases are 70 plus years old?  
 
 
https://brandontransit.ca/images/FINALroutes/AllRoutes_Repres_RevisedII.pdf

no worries.. I have no come across that the city has inquired or even firmly asked the provincial government to cover most of the cost of this project. It is scary to think they haven't, maybe they have, but maybe they haven't. They didn't release any information that they have.  
 
But just like any citizen of Brandon, not matter what your income is.. I do not want to see my water bill go up 3x what it is now, and I'm talking about quarterly water bills. The way interest rates are going and inflation, I bet that 30 million will not be enough.

If you can direct us to the information on the level of support the province and federal government is putting into these projects that would be great.  
 
The one number we will never know is how much more we as taxpayers are going to need to pay when these projects are done vs if they had been done 3 plus years ago.  
 
If you listen to this city council meeting on you tube at the 1 hr 30 minutes, it will give lots of good info. At 2 hrs 7 minutes you will hear from the owners of the land that is part of the decision of the province re access. Do you sense a degree of frustration? How much money do you think all this work cost? Very eye-opening.  
 

You bring up a few issues here.  
 
First, separate the issues a bit.  
 
1. Old Sobeys location. The rumour is that Sobeys still holds the lease on the old location and as such Shindico can't redevelop it. This was to avoid competition from something like FreshCo or similar coming into the space. So unless you have information that states otherwise, I wouldn't assume Canadian Tire would suffer the same fate. Although I agree that it's an eyesore and embarrassing. I wish Sobeys would be a better corporate neighbour and not let the building sit vacant.  
 
2. Recycling Bins. People abuse them, no matter where they're located. I have some not far from us at the corner of 34th & Vic, and they are often in poor condition too, with illegal dumping and all. People are lazy/cheap/ill-informed. The one at the Keystone is particularly bad for reasons I don't care to even begin to speculate on. But that's an issue separate from the others you've stated.  
 
3. Green space vs. parking lots. I mean, if you really want to get into it, the parking lots there sit empty or near-empty 95% of the time too. They are a complete eyesore and just adds to the bleakness of so many urban landscapes. They generate very little revenue relative to the footprint they occupy. They are heat sinks and effect drainage and ultimately diminish quality of life.  
 
Public holdings and services, like green space, libraries, or even transit, neither need to or not should generate self-sustaining revenue. They are for the public good. We don't expect things like schools, police departments or even road infrastructure to be self-sustaining or even revenue-generating - if we did, there would be fees for primary/secondary schools, pay-per-call for emergency services (which, incidently, we've started with ambulance fees) or toll roads.  
 
(On roads: Yes, I realize that "gas tax" is supposed to be going into road infrastructure, but the reality is - a) a lot of it doesn't, and b) it's not even remotely enough to maintain the roads we currently have, never mind build new ones. Our roads are *heavily* subsidized by other tax revenues. There is no way for them to be self-sustaining in the current tax scheme.)  
 
Green spaces are invaluable for the public good and for the health of the city. They make cities more liveable, healthier (both physically and mentally) and generally more attractive. Green space needs to be accessible to everyone, which means developing them into a "pay per use" scheme isn't really the best option either. There should be minimal barriers to entry.  
 
Now, if you're talking about green spaces being *neglected*, that's another matter entirely.  
 
Urban green spaces require maintenance, and policy makers are often reluctant to spend too much money on it. This perception of them being a "waste" has a lot to do with it, because we live in a society where things are not simply allowed to exist because they can or simply because of their innate goodness. It's part of the reason why arts struggles for funding, or library budgets are often first cut, or why people on social assistance or homeless are often derided and given no status in our society.

Sobeys takes a lot of heat on here about that lease.  
 
It's my understanding that they held a lease that expires October 2023. When they moved across the street to the mall, they don't get to just walk away from the lease. They would have to keep it and continue to pay it unless they want to sublease it or the landlord lets them out of their lease.  
 
From what I can tell online, there have been attempts to sublease the location. Problem is, if nobody wants it, then it still belongs to Sobeys until October 2023.  
 
See the following example of efforts to sublease:  
 
https://images1.loopnet.com/d2/bm8fec0iuTzoKao8ArvQERApghYfLJFrq2zVgXrdwBU/document.pdf

On my previous posted video if you go to 2 hrs 15 min the representative of the land that the access is needed of number 10 indicates that they have 50 % of the land in that commercial development with verbal commitments. The comment from the potential future Mayor indicates if they could see them than that may change his opinion if it should be developed at one project or two. Listen to what he says.  
 
The issue is these people are experienced developers. The city council and administration are not. At one time the city did development and got out of the game as it was too risky. Teh commercial companies they indicated are interested feel that this location is the best for them. Who are we to say otherwise.  
 
City administration recommended and city council voted 100% in favor of the land being brought into the city and agreed to do so knowing what the intentions were for the land.

The reason the water increase is so drastic is the city was not smart enough to charge more then the operation costs in the past. They needed to be saving for infrastructure upgrades and unforseen repairs throughout the years.  
 
I also find it interesting that there is no complaints about wetlands or green space being degraded at the retention pond being dug across from Paul's hauling on behalf of the city.  
 
I'm also certain all of the anti development people in this thread will be shopping at the development once it's occupied. They will perhaps even start a thread complaining about the high prices without realizing the consequences of delaying inevitable developments. How many times has the Costco topic come up on this site and everyone wants it.