I can visualize the glazed look when the municipal bureaucrats were asked to move a little faster.

I think the problem with the PGCCC lands is summed up in the last paragraph.

The city's planning staff have been told that there are other priorities over and over again. Smart Growth on the Ground last year, myPG last year and this year. The Official Community Plan review that will take the rest of the year. The Mayors Task Force has been asking staff to move forward on several items as well, plus the regular work they have to do.

Not a lot of staff time left after all that for the Golf Club.

MyPG or Golf course? MyPG or Golf course? Let's see, which will it be? Planning for 25+ years down the road, or planning for the current users of a peice of property which people have been wanting to buy every now and then pending the intention of the City.

Priorities. Does anyone know how to set them at City Hall? Council? Senior administrators? Is middle management able to do the job that needs to be done?

These are issues that people in the prvate sector face many times during the course of doing business. How to balance existing staff and resources with the pressure of clients.

We are forgetting the current pressures on downtown in that whole scenario. What we are forgetting about is that there are no plans created by planning for all those properties that have been bought on which the buildings will soon be demolished.

Now we have the added push of a new DBIA group that rightly or wrongly want to get off their asses and do something more meaningful than hanging baskets and xmas lights and blue coloured street "furniture".

BTW, wahtever happened to the 4th avenue "beutification"? And then there is the community energy plant.

Lot's of "stuff" falling off the edge of people's desk. I am assuming the winter games 2015 was not one of them. Many of the same people would have spent some time on that little project as well.

It would be interesting to do a bit of an inventory of tasks that the City has in front of it, when they started, and when they were/are scheduled to be completed and what the priorities might be from the point of view of the citizens of the community.

"Not a lot of staff time left after all that for the Golf Club."

Depends on how much staff there actually is, how well they are suited for the job they have been asked to do, and how frequently their supervisors have asked them to go back to the "drawing boards" to adjust what they have presented.

"MyPG or Golf course? MyPG or Golf course? Let's see, which will it be? Planning for 25+ years down the road, or planning for the current users of a peice of property which people have been wanting to buy every now and then pending the intention of the City"

Hopefully the former. We've seen enough examples of the "master plan" being ignored just to appease one particular investor or developer (think casino leaving downtown) and the resulting negative impact on the development of the city.

If we want patchwork development, by all means, ignore every plan that has been developed. If we truly want to make positive improvements, create a solid plan, implement it, evaluate it as time goes on and make necessary changes to the plan (as required) in order to achieve the primary goals that were identified in the first place.

The role of the city is to develop the plan and strategy for how things will evolve. If the plan is solid and has merit, investors will find ways to make money within its confines. We shouldn't sacrifice the long-term goals of the city just to make a quick buck on a substandard or less than ideal development.

In spite of waht I wrote, I agree with you 100% NMG.

We do have a current plan. It is called the OCP. The OCP basically states that some of the potential uses that are being looked at for the golf course site should not go there but should go downtown - retail, offices, entertainment, etc.

That is the current plan against which any development at the golf course should be measured.

I think the golf courese also should not be given any special consideration than any other land owner or business.

The way other landowners handle such matters is that they develop the plan in consultation with the planning department. Or they get the potential purchaser ot develop the plan. Make a subject to offer and put you money up front. The city should not have to come up with plans for land owners or developers. We would have to double or triple staff if we were to do that at taxpayers' expense rather than land owners and developer's expense.

If the City wants part of the property to exchange for a par three golf course reloaction, so be it. Let the land owner know that, along with the specifics and they will work it out.

Housing and park. That is about it. As far as how the OCP will look in the future (that will be where the land use part of the MyPG exercise will end up as well as the SGOG project) who knows. It was supposed to have been started in 2006. We cannot stop development in the City for future plans. We have an OCP. That is what we work from at this time.

BTW, it continues to look to me like the City is continuing to have a difficult time making timely and decisive decisions against current accepted standards and policies in place.

We spend almost $2 million a year in salaries and benefits for planners at City Hall.

Amazingly little planning gets done there. Lots of meetings and paper shuffles, though.

This is how others do it.

Guelph Ontario - the City's web site with most recent planning exercise. SGOG has a long way to go to get to the stage this plan is at. Lot's of money spent with little but a very high level look which focused on too few aspects of downtown.

http://guelph.ca/living.cfm?itemid=78561&smocid=1878

The plan so far http://guelph.ca/uploads/Planning/2010%20DowntownPlan/030910_DSP_OpenHouse.pdf

And here is the Guelph DBIA's web site.

http://www.downtownguelph.com/page.php?id=11

They do more than just flower basket hanging. The deal with the planning for the downtown as well. Luckily they have a plan developed by the City that they can address. Our DBIA has a vacuum to respond to.

http://downtownguelph.com/cms/documents/Downtown_Guelph_Community_Improvement_Plan_-_Feb_17_2009_FINAL.pdf

http://www.downtownguelph.com/cms/documents/2008_Annual_Report_&_AP09_AGM_Presentation.pdf

Time to get started PG!!

Stump removal a condition of sale? 200 man years of work there. Sorry! 200 "person" years of work there.

The PG Golf Club has stupid, outdated rules that no one likes. Other golf clubs in town are far less stringent. As the older members pass on or move to retire, there is no desire for anyone to fill the empty memberships. They have to get their nose out of the air before they can expect higher membership. I will not golf there again after being told, not asked, to leave with a brand new pair of jeans that acquired a small half inch rip (rear pocket)just before I arrived at the club house with tickets to a tournament.