Comment 88540

By jim (anonymous) | Posted May 09, 2013 at 13:38:21

"In infill redevelopment, when new construction comes close to your lot, your property value goes up as developers want to buy it to build more new units"

This was how things used to work when you were able to simply buy up a block, take down all the houses and build skyscrapers. That hasn't happened in round about 40 years.

The DNA was organized in the face of the mess of skyscrapers built between Hunter and Herkimer, Queen and James in the 60s-70s. Notice there are none west of Queen or south of Herkimer. Just like greenfield lands in Elfrida or Binbrook, many owners were happy to sell because of the quick buck they could make, to hell with their gorgeous Victorian. It didn't have to go that way. Plenty of planners and architect showed you can build density in keeping with neighbourhoods by providing scaled heights. Of course developers rebel, they want to make the maximum profit possible. But neighbourhood voices, the ones interested in the wellbeing of the neighbourhood and not just the flip value of their house, are the only thing standing in the way of the type of pillaging developers do just about everywhere else.

As for the DC waiver, Steve (can I call you Steve?), you didn't get that because you were outside the zone. Are you aware that pretty much all inner city water mains will need replacing in the next few decades? The cost of replacement will dwarf new construction on greenfields. It's nice we throw a bone to infill, but it's a bit false if you ask me.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools