You are not logged in.

#16 2012-10-02 09:09:49

Steel
Member
Registered: 2008-02-16
Posts: 2521

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

bulldog wrote:

mr Nelson says" Ryan won unlimited height at the OMB hearing." 

is that true????  because that would set a precident and there are a few sites coming up for development that it would be benefiscial if you could literally build up to outer space.....................

Unlimited height is as rediculous a statement as I don't need a site plan....OMB would never in a million years grant anything as "unlimited"....the potential liability then becomes unlimited too.

Offline

 

#17 2012-10-02 09:20:10

Steel
Member
Registered: 2008-02-16
Posts: 2521

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

Ryan will lose this round and lose quickly. Not only will he lose he will be saddled with the costs of both sides. I will then claim he can't possibly pay and will try to involve another court process to get out of it....

I think the gig is up with this guy and his games.

Offline

 

#18 2012-10-02 18:24:35

bulldog
Member
Registered: 2008-03-05
Posts: 665

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

paper terrorism.................

Offline

 

#19 2012-10-13 01:02:30

mr.nelson
Member
Registered: 2008-02-06
Posts: 416

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

Steel wrote:

bulldog wrote:

mr Nelson says" Ryan won unlimited height at the OMB hearing." 

is that true????  because that would set a precident and there are a few sites coming up for development that it would be benefiscial if you could literally build up to outer space.....................

Unlimited height is as rediculous a statement as I don't need a site plan....OMB would never in a million years grant anything as "unlimited"....the potential liability then becomes unlimited too.

The first link is the decision from the OMB:

https://acrobat.com/?d=cj96mFSg6W7wrQ8DbDTs5A

The second link is the bylaw that states and is highlighted in faded yellow:

https://acrobat.com/?d=qGOtEFm8lkr5VgqgIaUxyw


I have read the bylaw and it says that the site plan had no restrictions for height.
Cooper lot 14.4.2 d. is the bylaw that states nothing shall restrict height...


You Can't Fix Stupid!

Offline

 

#20 2012-10-13 06:51:49

bulldog
Member
Registered: 2008-03-05
Posts: 665

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

the pdf's you have shared with us indicate that private ryan was supposed to follow C3 zoning.  which would have zoning restrictions regarding height.   there are exemptions as indicated in the document for elevator shafts, church spires and such.  but by no means does this indicate unlimited hieght of buildings....to interpret this in the private ryan fashion indicates a phsyicosis such as the free land sovereigntists.   another group of wackos challenging government and authority...........

Offline

 

#21 2012-10-14 00:53:34

mr.nelson
Member
Registered: 2008-02-06
Posts: 416

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

mr.nelson wrote:

The first link is the decision from the OMB:

https://acrobat.com/?d=cj96mFSg6W7wrQ8DbDTs5A

The second link is the bylaw that states and is highlighted in faded yellow:

https://acrobat.com/?d=qGOtEFm8lkr5VgqgIaUxyw


I have read the bylaw and it says that the site plan had no restrictions for height.

Cooper lot 14.4.2 d. is the bylaw that states nothing shall restrict height...

nothing in this bylaw shall apply to restrict the height of the following structures,

anybody can see it in black and white

On the second page,

xv) a tower

and understand what it says.

This means the Cooper lot has the only rights in the city of stratford to build a tower or multiple towers. The omb made the decision to allow this project to proceed according to the bylaws already in place and as agreed within the decision.


You Can't Fix Stupid!

Offline

 

#22 2012-10-14 09:50:00

rankinfile
Moderator
Registered: 2007-12-28
Posts: 843

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

Ah, I see
"
anybody can see it in black and white

On the second page,

xv) a tower

and understand what it says."

So you think this means, like "an office tower", a "hotel tower", a "Bank tower" because these types of towers are significantly different from "water towers and radio towers and clock tower, which are specifically listed.

Hmmm...well perhaps someone up to date on the creation of specific legal wording can suggest---should "tower" be interpreted in a broad inclusive  sence...or should the formulation of the by law require specificity requiring the listing of all types of towers that are in fact permitted--as it appears they have done with including specifics like clock towers, radio antennas, windmills, etc.

In other words...if the by law does not say you can't build something, well of course you must be able to build it.  If they had wanted to prohibit a specific type of structure, or use, they are required to specifically state those types of structures of uses that are prohibited.  That would be quite the list.  I would suggest permitted uses are what one would expect to see listed!

Offline

 

#23 2012-10-14 10:29:37

Steel
Member
Registered: 2008-02-16
Posts: 2521

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

Nutty Neilson and Loonie Larry.....

Larry will lose this round and as i said lose quickly and painfully. The man is an idiot....and you Neilson aren't far behind as you just keep drinking the kool-aid

Offline

 

#24 2012-10-15 20:57:38

mr.nelson
Member
Registered: 2008-02-06
Posts: 416

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

David Imrie is at the OMB hearing over the expropriation of land in Stratford for the new UW campus.

http://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipI … d=1.815923

Last edited by mr.nelson (2012-10-15 20:58:45)


You Can't Fix Stupid!

Offline

 

#25 2012-10-16 11:57:05

mr.nelson
Member
Registered: 2008-02-06
Posts: 416

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

City, Ryan headed to mediation
Stratford Beacon Herald


To mediate or to arbitrate?

That was a question before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) Monday during a hearing at city hall to determine how to proceed with a $25-million claim against the city by the former owner of the Cooper property.

After hours of debate by lawyers on both sides, OMB chair Linda Tanaka opted for mediation, granting a motion by the city to send the complex dispute to the Ontario Board of Negotiation, a body that deals with compensation for land expropriation.

The city expropriated the land from Lawrence Ryan and his numbered Ontario company in 2009, and both sides signed minutes of settlement solidifying that $4.5-million deal for the former CNR locomotive repair shops and surrounding property early in 2010.

But under the Expropriation Act, the former owner is entitled to seek further compensation, and the numbered company’s recent notice of arbitration and statement of claim seeks just that -- $25 million for the market value of the property, as well as a long list of damages resulting from what the company has suggested is a “campaign of interference” and delay by the city in previous attempts to develop it.

That argument was renewed Monday, with legal counsel for the numbered company arguing that the city’s motion to take the matter to the Board of Negotiation is simply another delay tactic.

Chris Williams, representing the city, dismissed that as “nonsensical.”

“The city is the one party here that does not want this matter delayed any longer than it has been,” he said, suggesting that the process has already been convoluted and expensive enough as it is.

The Board of Negotiation could actually speed the process along, he said, noting that the informal mediation process might resolve some of the issues between the two sides outright, or at least help to define the issues more clearly and “put some reality” on the complex matter in advance of an OMB hearing.

But John Doherty, representing Ryan’s numbered company, argued that the minutes of settlement themselves anticipate an arbitrated decision, not a mediated settlement, and make no mention of the Board of Negotiation step.

“After the execution of the minutes of settlement, there was clearly an understanding that this matter was going to proceed through an arbitration process at the Ontario Municipal Board,” he said.

It's the OMB, not the Board of Negotiation, that has the power to determine compensation, added Doherty, and it’s the proper forum to deal with a complicated dispute with a long history of litigation.

“That's our submission today,” he said. “Let’s get on with it.”

The OMB chair agreed with the need to move things forward.

“If the city is adamant that it wishes to go to the Board of Negotiation, then it should do so expeditiously,” said Tanaka.

Both sides agreed to pursue a Board of Negotiation date sometime in December or January.

And in an attempt to satisfy the numbered company’s concerns about delaying the process, Tanaka put a specific timeline to it, urging the city to respond to Ryan’s statement of claim within 45 days of the Board of Negotiation meeting, should no settlement be reached.

mike.beitz@sunmedia.ca


You Can't Fix Stupid!

Offline

 

#26 2012-10-18 12:31:24

spankie
Member
Registered: 2008-01-01
Posts: 1350

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

So Loser Larry wants a timeline placed on when he can argue that he's owed more money. What about a timeline for actually doing something with the said property? He didn't seem in any hurry to fix the property up or develop it but now he claims he lost income?? How can you have income from an empty lot that's unsafe to work on??

Last edited by spankie (2012-10-18 12:32:03)

Offline

 

#27 2012-10-28 15:30:25

spankie
Member
Registered: 2008-01-01
Posts: 1350

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

So again I ask how can Larry claim a loss of income when the site has remained undeveloped for 10 years? Exactly how was he making any money? Also he says the site has not been fully used and that he should get the unused part back. Well the only reason the rest of the site is unused is that a group came forward to claim the building was of historical significance thus stopping any development until this issue was decided and to what extent the building could be used. So if this was holding up the city how was Larry going to magically make that issue disappear unless it was friends or colleagues of his who where behind it in the first place and he knew he could get them to drop the case at his request.

Why is any court even willing to hears his nonsense anymore?

Offline

 

#28 2013-04-27 15:39:58

mr.nelson
Member
Registered: 2008-02-06
Posts: 416

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

LC120027



 



IN THE MATTER OF section 37 of the Ontario Municipal Board Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O. 28, as amended, and Rule 34 of the Board’s Rules of Practice and Procedure



 


 

Request by: 

The City of Stratford


Request for:

Request to Strike the Notice of Arbitration and Statement of Claim


APPOINTMENT FOR HEARING BY TELECONFERENCE


The Ontario Municipal Board will be holding a telephone conference for individuals of the general public to listen to the above noted matter.

This hearing will be held:


        at:          10:00AM

       on:        Tuesday April 30th

                   
Individuals wishing to listen in on the Motion taking place shall call (416) 212-8012** or Toll Free 1-(866) 633-0848 on the assigned date at the correct time.  When prompted, enter the code 4779874# and you will be connected to the call.  If assistance is required at any time, press ‘0’ for the operator.  Cellular telephones are not permitted to be used for the call.  It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the call to ensure that they are properly connected to the call and at the correct time. 

Hearing dates are firm ‑ adjournments will not be granted except in the most serious circumstances, and only in accordance with the Board's Rules on Adjournments.

In the event the decision is reserved, persons taking part in the hearing and wishing a copy of the decision may request a copy from the presiding Board member or, in writing, from the Board.  Such decision will be mailed to you when available.

Pour recevoir des services en français, veuillez communiquer avec la Division des audiences au (416) 212-6349, au moins 20 jours civils avant la date fixée pour l'audience.

We are committed to providing services as set out in the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005. If you have any accessibility needs, please contact our Accessibility Coordinator as soon as possible.


**Charges incurred for international calls will be the responsibility of the caller.



DATED at Toronto, this 26th day of April, 2013.



                                                                                          JOANNE HAYES
                                                                             
                                                                                            SECRETARY


You Can't Fix Stupid!

Offline

 

#29 2013-04-28 06:50:09

Steel
Member
Registered: 2008-02-16
Posts: 2521

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

LOL...OMB figures this is such nonsense they have decided to do it by phone...LOL

Offline

 

#30 2013-05-01 18:11:44

rankinfile
Moderator
Registered: 2007-12-28
Posts: 843

Re: The City of Stratford is facing a $25-million statement of claim

Or was this that the City just refused to "negotiate"....like they did not "negotiate" the contract last year with the fire fighters.... just so they could send it to mediation, and throw up their hands..."Hey, this ridiculous payment wasn't our fault...we did everything we could...but it was that turkey mediator that dumped the ridiculous bill on you poor taxpayers!!!"

Just saying....

Offline

 


Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2008 PunBB