Wednesday, 20 February 2008

More on Uppper Fort Garry .. um .. Gate

Vandal decides to pipe-up ... from the Freep:

City councillor Dan Vandal figures a plan to turn the site of Upper Fort Garry into a heritage site shouldn't hinge on whether a non-profit group trying to preserve the site of Winnipeg's birthplace makes its fundraising deadline.

Vandal introduced a motion this morning urging his counterparts on city council to reject an earlier committee decision to sell the land that Upper Fort Garry sits on to developers.

Vandal said he believed the city should open discussion about the future of the Upper Fort Garry site to the public.

Ok first, to whoever wrote this: Is starting an article with three consecutive 1-sentence paragraphs beginning with the subject's name proper journalistic writing technique? Just asking ... I'm not a journalist myself.

Regarding the actual topic of the article .. what does Vandal think he's doing? "It's not too late" he says. Not too late for what, to break a contract that was signed in good faith? To piss off a developer? Hey Vandal, it's not too late to protect your computer against the Y2K bug. Sheesh.

More from his website:
“I was always uncomfortable with building a condominium near these historically important lands. I was also uncomfortable with the lack of transparency in approving this deal. Now that we have conclusive evidence the fort’s walls are further west than expected, we should simply negotiate another piece of land for the developer and concentrate on preserving the integrity of Upper Fort Garry,”

What a bunch of crap. I remember hearing more about this condo proposal than any other since Excelsior. And wasn't the development adjusted to accommodate the revised footprint of the old fort? How do you "simply negotiate another piece of land"? He's been playing too much Monopoly.

So you think the public should have more input on important matters? I would like some input on giving $7m to a developer for a water park. I would like some input on building whole new neighbourhoods in the south end of the city, even though our population growth is minimal and we can't properly fund the infrastructure to support it. There plenty of things I would like to have input on, but the UFG ship is leaving port. What have you been doing all this time, Vandal?

***

Update: The Rise and Sprawl makes a good point, that Vandal didn't object when the Tache condos went up next to historic structures in St.Boniface, including the Basilica. Seems like a little bit of hypocritical band-wagon jumping to me. (Thanks for the link, by the way).

Oh yeah .. and Gordy thinks that Vandal's last minute interference is "fun".

3 comments:

PolicyFrog said...

Bingo. This issue has been kicking around for nearly a year now, and Dan waits until the last minute before taking a side? Too little, too late.

jonathan said...

Maybe the reporter has been taking writing tips from Gordon Sinclair.

That guy never puts more than a single sentence in a paragraph.

Or sometimes just a fragment.

It's true.

cherenkov said...

Perhaps I should draw a triangle diagram showing the development process in this town. :-)

 
/* Google Tracker Code