Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
I don't like the massing and scale of this proposal or the materials. I think they can do a lot better. It's got nothing to do with height though, and actually the height gives the developer the flexibility to have better massing given a certain number of units.
I wasn't at the public meeting so I don't know what the tone was like, but often the terms of debate are wrong. Sometimes members of the public and even councillors (e.g. Gloria McCluskey) treat the meetings as "yea or nay" popularity contests rather than a dialogue on what aspects of the development can be improved. I think this accounts for a huge amount of the friction that exists and it may even result in lower quality development, since a short-circuited process often results in developers running to the NSUARB and then building what they wanted.
|
This is exactly my issue with public information meetings - which is why I've always encouraged my fellow planners to let people vent and then challenge them (the speakers) for solutions. A few years ago I was doing a land use and had to go to the public meeting and the community wasn't happy and so I sat and let the first person vent. When I responded and challenged him for his solutions, I think the whole room looked at me funny - they weren't expecting it. I guess for me, as a planner, I don't like having PIM's for the sake of you must go out and talk. If I'm going to be there for 3 hours (when I could be at home or doing something else) - I want it to be productive. Yes, the overtime is nice...but still. lol