There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?
Recent Articles
- Justice for Indigenous Peoples is Long Overdueby Ryan McGreal, published June 30, 2021 in Commentary
(0 comments)
- Third-Party Election Advertising Ban About Silencing Workersby Chantal Mancini, published June 29, 2021 in Politics
(0 comments)
- Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?by Ryan McGreal, published June 29, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- An Update on Raise the Hammerby Ryan McGreal, published June 28, 2021 in Site Notes
(0 comments)
- Nestlé Selling North American Water Bottling to an Private Equity Firmby Doreen Nicoll, published February 23, 2021 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- Jolley Old Sam Lawrenceby Sean Burak, published February 19, 2021 in Special Report: Cycling
(0 comments)
- Right-Wing Extremism is a Driving Force in Modern Conservatismby Ryan McGreal, published February 18, 2021 in Special Report: Extremism
(0 comments)
- Municipalities Need to Unite against Ford's Firehose of Land Use Changesby Michelle Silverton, published February 16, 2021 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Challenging Doug Ford's Pandemic Narrativeby Ryan McGreal, published January 25, 2021 in Special Report: COVID-19
(1 comment)
- The Year 2020 Has Been a Wakeup Callby Michael Nabert, published December 31, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- The COVID-19 Marshmallow Experimentby Ryan McGreal, published December 22, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- All I Want for Christmas, 2020by Kevin Somers, published December 21, 2020 in Entertainment and Sports
(1 comment)
- Hamilton Shelters Remarkably COVID-19 Free Thanks to Innovative Testing Programby Jason Allen, published December 21, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
- Province Rams Through Glass Factory in Stratfordby Doreen Nicoll, published December 21, 2020 in Healing Gaia
(0 comments)
- We Can Prevent Traffic Deaths if We Make Safety a Real Priorityby Ryan McGreal, published December 08, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(5 comments)
- These Aren't 'Accidents', These Are Resultsby Tom Flood, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report: Walkable Streets
(1 comment)
- Conservation Conundrumby Paul Weinberg, published December 04, 2020 in Special Report
(0 comments)
- Defund Police Protest Threatens Fragile Ruling Classby Cameron Kroetsch, published December 03, 2020 in Special Report: Anti-Racism
(2 comments)
- Measuring the Potential of Biogas to Reduce GHG Emissionsby John Loukidelis and Thomas Cassidy, published November 23, 2020 in Special Report: Climate Change
(0 comments)
- Ontario Squanders Early Pandemic Sacrificeby Ryan McGreal, published November 18, 2020 in Special Report: COVID-19
(0 comments)
Article Archives
Blog Archives
Site Tools
Feeds
By RobF (registered) | Posted March 20, 2018 at 11:55:45 in reply to Comment 122621
Jason, there is nothing NIMBY about setting a height limit at 30 storeys. The maximum height in the current downtown secondary plan is 12 storeys, I think. That we have buildings above that is true, but not overly relevant.
We can argue about the merits of a height limit ... i understand the practical logic from a land-use planning perspective of setting height limits, but I'm not opposed to taller buildings, per se. My references to Vancouver are to suggest that their debate and rules have evolved over time to adjust to changing circumstances.
The problem is a practical/legal one ... our planning regime, especially under the old OMB land-use appeal framework, means that any prior (especially recent) decision is used by proponents to justify their application. I understand the logic that Brad Lamb is applying that hey we could build a really ugly 20 storey box that maximizes our density permissions, but we'd like to build something a bit more slender and stylish and need height to do it. If that is the debate then let's have it. But let's start with some honesty ... we don't know what his bottom line is, because we don't know what he paid for the land and we don't know how difficult it is for him to sell the units and finance the construction.
Height limits can be NIMBY if they preclude reasonable development from happening ... but that is quite different than this. He could build a stylish tower under the incoming DTSP framework. Just not two towers and not to the height he is proposing. He's a businessman. He's trying to get the best deal for Brad Lamb. Nothing wrong with that. I don't work for him. I want the best deal with us ... downtown residents and the City as whole. Just arguing that we should approve whatever a proponent pitches because that's intensification is a recipe for problems.
Comment edited by RobF on 2018-03-20 11:57:30
Permalink | Context