[JET]

Originally Posted by counterfactual

I don't think it's mandate or not; that may simply deter development, and we really want both. Instead, you could also, as someone123 suggests, create strong incentives for heritage preservation.

But to do that, we need to get over our obsession with height limits.

If we did, you could say: you can only build this high as of right. But you can build a single tower this high, or build up higher, if you preserve these built heritage elements. You get significant density and height bonuses for preserving heritage/facades, etc.

That is what is required. But again, it means abolishing/amending the stupid viewplanes laws, one of the banes of this city's existence.

Heritage laws that mandate the maintenance and preservation of our built heritage, work really well when combined with tax disincentives for undeveloped land; where property owners have incentives to maintain properties, and significant disincentives for not maintaining properties or vacant land. There are so many empty lots where buildings came down and nothing happens, that are an eyesore and the tax is a pittance.