Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds
No. I'm not complaining about that development at all. I quite like it.
As for a review board, as I said, I don't think we need a dominant city force that showers hell on bold development - rather guidelines that limit the use of stucco and advance more walkable development with better street engagement - which I think they've done a better job over the years. Moreover, I do think certain areas of the city should be regulated a tad more than the city as a whole - you know, a hospitality building like this:
Should never be approved by the city in its downtown core - at least in that state. Would anyone have had problems with the city enforcing a more urban design on a project like that even if it meant it would be delayed a few months? I certainly wouldn't. But the laissez-faire approach the city government has toward development, IMO, is not working. |
I agree with you completely on this, and I am pretty sure that the current zoning, even where this Crystal Inn is located, would no longer allow such a development, if something new where to be built there is would much more urban in design and would interact with the sidewalk and street in a much more downtown way. I think in the early to mid 90's (this was built in 94) the city was still fighting to become more competitive with the burbs as many cities were, and I'm sure the zoning at that time was simply as a result of that.
Threaded Mode