Quote:
Originally Posted by halifaxboyns
If a developer wants a relaxation for say height (if it's not governed by something like a viewplane or a 'non relaxable height limit') then - what do I get for the City?
|
I agree that this is better than having rigid rules, but I think that there are still a couple of problems with this approach. One problem is that developers already pay fees and property owners pay taxes to HRM, and these are supposed to cover amenities like public space. Another problem, already mentioned, is that there's a big double standard between the downtown projects where developers have to pay for a basket of goodies and suburban projects where they throw up whatever conforms to the bylaws and then HRM picks up the tab later by building necessary infrastructure like the Washmill underpass.
I'd expect developers to feel a bit cheated as long as groups like the DRC have a "what do
we get?" sort of attitude. This similar to the unfairness that existed pre-HbD; special interest groups would come forward with a laundry list of demands and developers were pressured to meet them or deal with appeals. There were no clear rules, so the process was easily abused. One very important thing to keep in mind is that the DRC meeting isn't a real negotiation, it's a situation where the developer is subject to the whims of a bureaucratic "gatekeeper" authority.
Threaded Mode