Comment 63840

By Nord Blanc (anonymous) | Posted May 20, 2011 at 08:03:53 in reply to Comment 63833

I'd be in favour of the city doing the bare minimum with this site – remediating the property and instituting acceptable guidelines, but letting the public sector take a breather for a change and letting the private sector cheerlead for a change. While the location is not without its potential negatives, this could be prime real estate in many regards.

As a city, we need to change our development model from taxpayer-exclusive to taxpayer-assisted, if only because that allows change to occur at a setting faster than "Water Torture". We also would do well to avoid the supersized mundanity that tends to come with any contemporary public project of appreciable scale. The standard worrywart argument is that we don't want to see Queens Quay-style development along Guise Street, or something like that, but I'd argue that having it the multi-unit stock dominated by co-ops and bland, piecemeal projects like Marina Towers, Harbour Towers and the like are compromised accomplishments at best, builds that give a front-row seat to uninspired architecture that'd be equally at home at Mohawk and Upper James. Cabbagetown-on-the-Bay would suit a certain number of homeowners but I would advocate for a more ambitious, multidimensional approach.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools