Comment 122609

By Locke (registered) | Posted March 19, 2018 at 22:21:59

It seems to me the planning staff have some decent thinking about this. They're not saying no to development, but asking for the plan to be improved and conform to the secondary plan and best practices for set backs and Tall Building Design guidelines.

The biggest issue, I'd guess, is at 40 stories these two towers would be 2 to 5 times taller than the other tall buildings around them, while flaunting the rules suggesting 30 stories across the downtown. I'm not against 40 stories, but wouldn't these be more appropriate at King and James? Some variety of height would be appealing on this site and that can be achieved in 30 stories and not look quite so strange popping up from the nearby towers at almost double the height.

The other danger of allowing the developer to 'maximize' this particular parcel of land, is it then reduces the demand to produce maybe 180 housing units somewhere else downtown -- We don't need just two towers on one lot, but developments across the downtown which improve other parking lots and neglected properties too.

This just looks like Lamb wants to build towers on high land which he can sell at a premium for their guaranteed views. It will do nothing to alleviate housing shortages but will certainly maximize the developer's profits.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds