Council believes in this project... but we'll be watching

   Usually, when covering a city council meeting, I use the Bylaws portion of the agenda as prep time for the media question period soon to follow.

   The reading of the bylaws comes at the end of the agenda, and it is usually a formality.

   Often, as was the case on Tuesday when council gave the final green light to the Water Street development land sale (see the sidebar at the bottom), the bylaw simply puts into practice what council has already decided in a motion.

   The clerk usually reads the bylaws and councillors automatically raise their hands in agreement while shutting off their IPads and packing away their stuff on the quick slide to adjournment.

   So it's significant in itself that the Water Street bylaw passed not as a unanimous formality, but a 7-3 recorded vote, with Councillors Jason Baker, Tom Blanchard and Mary Jean McFall voting against.

   The bylaw authorizes the sale of city-owned land on Water Street and Market Street West, and part of Water Street, to Blockhouse Square Development Ltd., paving the way for the start of construction on a $58-million condominium and commercial project that includes the realignment of Water Street.

   Council already committed to selling the land in a May 21 vote.

   At the time, McFall put an amendment on the floor to require the developer to satisfy council on the matter of continuous parking during the project's construction. A majority of her colleagues defeated that amendment.

   At that meeting, she did not raise her hand on the motion to sell the land and move forward with the project. She told me later the vote happened too fast and she was “genuinely conflicted over having lost the vote to amend the project details and then being asked instantly to support the project anyway.”

   For his part, Baker said the dissenters on this past Tuesday's bylaw vote were concerned about “the final wording of the agreement,” which they felt was not strong enough in terms of committing “both sides.”

   By “both sides” one might read the developer's side.

   Blanchard in particular has been vocal about his worries that, without stronger language in the deal, the city may end up with a parking podium and nothing else.

   “I didn't feel there was sufficient detail that gave me a comfort level about the viability of the project,” Blanchard said Thursday.

   It's a moot point, perhaps, since the bylaw went through and the land sale is now proceeding.

   But having a 7-3 recorded vote on a bylaw that would normally sail through with barely a word spoken is a sign that, at the very least, some people on council will be watching events on Water Street very closely.