Comment 82357

By Selway (registered) | Posted October 27, 2012 at 10:26:38 in reply to Comment 82355

Oh sure they're up to code. Your distinction between the two models of development seems to me correct and elegant. But 'under the radar' is the problem. Small scale incremental improvement is deprecated in favour of the Big Fix. Whatever the financial outcome may be, the large projects are continually degrading the built environment of the city. Yet we know that smallholders doing one three story renovation at a time works- not necessarily for each individual owner, but from the opportunist perspective of the uninvested bystander ie almost all of us, if Raj and Sally fail, and then Sue and Sarah step in and make the building work, we gain in the long run without suffering any of the losses of the short run.

If you look at the overall picture I think our pattern is incremental small scale is saving entire city blocks, building by building, while at the same time entire city blocks which are in the hands of one or a small group of "developers" sit idle for very long periods.

What the current proposal does is to take a block of King on the south side of Gore Park out of all possibility for applying the small scale model to improve it. This is probably a mistake.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds