HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted May 22, 2019, 8:37 PM
drew's Avatar
drew drew is offline
the first stamp is free
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hippyville, Winnipeg
Posts: 6,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
^ This is verging on the outright absurd... 75 foot lots are supposedly considered unacceptable?!
In some areas of the city, 75-feet would allow for three 25-foot lots.

This guy did it the wrong way. He should have submitted his application for a 25-foot lot, and then when everyone complained, offer up a 75-foot lot instead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted May 22, 2019, 9:07 PM
Gm0ney Gm0ney is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by drew View Post
In some areas of the city, 75-feet would allow for three 25-foot lots.

This guy did it the wrong way. He should have submitted his application for a 25-foot lot, and then when everyone complained, offer up a 75-foot lot instead.
Just leave it as a 152' x 130' lot and build a highrise condo.

Seriously though, I'm sure they're worried about precedence. I suppose it's a slippery slope once you start carving up those big lots in Old Tuxedo.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted May 22, 2019, 11:04 PM
pmuhar pmuhar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gm0ney View Post
Just leave it as a 152' x 130' lot and build a highrise condo.

Seriously though, I'm sure they're worried about precedence. I suppose it's a slippery slope once you start carving up those big lots in Old Tuxedo.
Id understand worrying about precedence if they were trying to make the second lot smaller than 75', but since most lots are already 75' or smaller, this isnt really a worrisome precedent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted May 23, 2019, 12:02 PM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is online now
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 8,706
It is a worrisome precedent because the corner lots are meant to be a consistent size. if you live in Tuxedo you’re supposed to be making your money from your business or professional activities, or maybe from your trust funds — not from squeezing extra value out of your real estate by subdividing it contrary to the “city beautiful” principles that the developers of the suburb applied.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted May 23, 2019, 12:42 PM
cheswick's Avatar
cheswick cheswick is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: South Kildonan
Posts: 2,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 View Post
It is a worrisome precedent because the corner lots are meant to be a consistent size. if you live in Tuxedo you’re supposed to be making your money from your business or professional activities, or maybe from your trust funds — not from squeezing extra value out of your real estate by subdividing it contrary to the “city beautiful” principles that the developers of the suburb applied.
How are they supposed to be a consistent size? The lot across the street is 100ft. There’s a lot two corners over that’s 85ft.
__________________
There are 10 kinds of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted May 23, 2019, 12:47 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,802
I'd wager that the subdivision will get bounced because at the end of the day council will cower and cave like timid children at the demands of the heavy hitters behind the appeal.

But this certainly won't be the last application of its kind, and eventually someone well connected will request one and it will be granted. And life will go on, because splitting a 150' lot in half will have zero negative impact on the area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted May 23, 2019, 11:30 PM
blueandgoldguy blueandgoldguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,838
I suspect one day in the not too distant future, the Mint will close its doors for good. More and more transactions around the world involving no paper or coins...even in many third world countries. Another decade or two perhaps?

I guess the feds could sell the land to the city and it could be rezoned as residential. A mix of apartments and houses might be most suitable. The area measures around 800 metres by 400 metres not including the large forested area in the south west corner. I wonder how many people could realistically live there given the greater demands on the local road system?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted May 24, 2019, 2:19 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,802
^ Good point, I know a guy who works there and he says that business has been dropping precipitously. Even exporting is not what it used to be given that competition is ramping up. I suppose one could see the day where the Ottawa location could crank out enough to meet Canada's needs.

That is a lot of space at Lagimodiere and Fermor... I guess it could be converted to other light industrial uses, but I'm sure it would get snapped for residential use as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted May 24, 2019, 2:33 PM
plrh plrh is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 301
They could make washers there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted May 24, 2019, 3:26 PM
wardlow's Avatar
wardlow wardlow is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy6 View Post
It is a worrisome precedent because the corner lots are meant to be a consistent size. if you live in Tuxedo you’re supposed to be making your money from your business or professional activities, or maybe from your trust funds — not from squeezing extra value out of your real estate by subdividing it contrary to the “city beautiful” principles that the developers of the suburb applied.
The corner lots that flank Nanton Blvd. don't have a consistent size, and range between widths of 83' - 207'. I would think that if there were any active legal planning policies, regulations, or caveats upholding City Beautiful principles as they applied to the 1911 Tuxedo Park subdivision, either:
- the City wouldn't have recommended approval in the first place,
- one of the lawyers in the neighbourhood would have brought them to light by now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 2:41 AM
Wpg_Guy's Avatar
Wpg_Guy Wpg_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 4,310
Nice infill at 95 Borebank

__________________
WINNIPEG | Projects and Development
In The Future Every Building Will Be World-Famous For Fifteen Minutes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 6:18 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,664
Homeowners can hugely suck sometimes :rofl

No, this does NOT affect your way of life. Fuck right off and let the applicant do what he wants.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 7:13 PM
Gm0ney Gm0ney is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 182
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf13 View Post
Homeowners can hugely suck sometimes :rofl

No, this does NOT affect your way of life. Fuck right off and let the applicant do what he wants.
I took a drive through there the other day - it looks like a pretty good majority of the local homeowners are opposed to subdividing. Yes, even the ones who live on those slummy 75 foot lots...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 7:19 PM
Curmudgeon Curmudgeon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolf13 View Post
Homeowners can hugely suck sometimes :rofl

No, this does NOT affect your way of life. Fuck right off and let the applicant do what he wants.
Not every area appreciates the intrusion of narcissistic sociopaths. Consider neighbourhood aesthetics before planning any construction whatsoever, or develop your crap somewhere else.

Also, the picture above can not be 95 Borebank? It's decent though. Winnipeg does not use brick enough. Brick exudes permanence and quality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 7:22 PM
optimusREIM's Avatar
optimusREIM optimusREIM is online now
There is always a way
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 1,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Not every area appreciates the intrusion of narcissistic sociopaths. Consider neighbourhood aesthetics before planning any construction whatsoever, or develop your crap somewhere else.

Also, the picture above can not be 95 Borebank? It's decent though. Winnipeg does not use brick enough. Brick exudes permanence and quality.
I am also a fan. It almost feels like a brownstone or something. Really classy
__________________
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm."
Federalist #10, James Madison
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 7:28 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 24,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
narcissistic sociopaths
It sounds like you're talking about someone unreasonable enough to demand that the city prevent someone who owns a 150' lot from splitting it in half
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2019, 7:39 PM
Curmudgeon Curmudgeon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 510
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
It sounds like you're talking about someone unreasonable enough to demand that the city prevent someone who owns a 150' lot from splitting it in half
Not necessarily, depends on location and plan. Is the area in question primarily 75 foot lots? Do they plan to put two tall skinny houses on those lots that are twice as high as neighbouring houses and with the oversized garage will occupy the entire lot? Do they plan to use few windows? Because that for example is who I'm talking about. Take a tour of old St. Vital.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2019, 6:48 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Not every area appreciates the intrusion of narcissistic sociopaths. Consider neighbourhood aesthetics before planning any construction whatsoever, or develop your crap somewhere else.

Also, the picture above can not be 95 Borebank? It's decent though. Winnipeg does not use brick enough. Brick exudes permanence and quality.
Who paid for the lot? The neighbours, or the owner?

These narcissistic sociopaths have more rights in this matter than ignorant neighbours. Problem is that politicians can be spineless.

Obviously the issue is not binary like above, but in most simple terms, there is less logic on the side of the neighbours. Especially considering they have what the applicant wants... a narrower lot.

I've seen these things before in person and these issues have been talked about on this site; homeowners with motives will lie through their teeth to get their way. They will and impose the entirety of their entitlement upon the party that actually owns the property, without owning anything themselves.

Ownership has to matter, and has to be respected. Not saying they should have free reign, as there can be limits, but this case is not such an example.

Sometimes Winnipeg, sometimes society, sometimes this site seems to forget that we don't have a right to what we want, especially when somebody else owns it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2019, 7:06 PM
Curmudgeon Curmudgeon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 510
^ Who cares who paid for the lot? I can't erect a 20 foot fence in my back yard, nor can I allow my dogs to bark at 3 am, nor can I burn railway ties and nor can I put bear traps in my back yard to catch intruders. Should I be able to do these things, after all, it's my property and I pay the taxes. And if people didn't intrude they wouldn't get injured by the traps, right?.

There has to be a balance between individual rights and the community interest. There is zoning and there are standards, and the case of the latter they must be better defined and adhered to. Peace, Order and Good Government. If your plan for subdivision is does not degrade neighbourhood aesthetics then there likely will not be a lot of opposition.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2019, 8:13 PM
Wolf13 Wolf13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 1,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
^ Who cares who paid for the lot? I can't erect a 20 foot fence in my back yard, nor can I allow my dogs to bark at 3 am, nor can I burn railway ties and nor can I put bear traps in my back yard to catch intruders. Should I be able to do these things, after all, it's my property and I pay the taxes. And if people didn't intrude they wouldn't get injured by the traps, right?.

There has to be a balance between individual rights and the community interest. There is zoning and there are standards, and the case of the latter they must be better defined and adhered to. Peace, Order and Good Government. If your plan for subdivision is does not degrade neighbourhood aesthetics then there likely will not be a lot of opposition.
The bolded is the very most important part, and it's Orwellian that you take such a stance.

It's also an egregious fallacy to invoke the 20ft fence and dogs argument, as we all know reasonable factors are considered. It's alarming that people still use this approach to discuss.

I'm with you, real estate should not degrade the neighbourhood, and judging by the kinds of lot widths others have here, that no extreme offense is occurring. Furthermore, perhaps there are reasonable ways to subdivide even other properties while adding emphasis to materials, design, etc. Compliance should be a combined score, not an automatic fail system.

However, you're most wrong on one area... residents will always oppose, no matter how accommodating, adhering, or even correct your proposal is. They will lie through their teeth and claim your brick (just one shade too red) is giving them epilepsy. They will say children are dying if one car is added to the neighbourhood traffic. So the best approach is somewhere in between the 20ft tall statues or dying children, and I'm guessing this particular proposal already is right there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:14 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.