City planners may have come to the realization that railway lines and yards are outside their domain, therefore the city can't tell the railways what they can and can't do on their properties.
Aren't the railways regulated under federal jurisdiction?
Yes they are, and thank goodness for that. The Ports do operate on a good neighbour policy and try to work hand in hand with local governments, but there are limits and they will side with regional/national interests over local ones if a choice between them needs to be made.
In a move certain to lower the price of housing in Vancouver... City staff is recommending council approve a DCL increase of 10.3% this year, that's on top of the 8.8% increase they approved last year.
Location: The People's Glorious Republic of ... Sigh...
Posts: 8,516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlousa
In a move certain to lower the price of housing in Vancouver... City staff is recommending council approve a DCL increase of 10.3% this year, that's on top of the 8.8% increase they approved last year.
In a move certain to lower the price of housing in Vancouver... City staff is recommending council approve a DCL increase of 10.3% this year, that's on top of the 8.8% increase they approved last year.
I have been following this story as i live in the building opposite the brewery/restaurant and I have met alot of those people opposed to it (who by the way i found to be community-minded and progressive individuals)-- the issue is not NIMBYism, it is more against the fact that when they purchased the developer told flat out lies about what was happening--they told each buyer the same thing "artist studios and possibly some retail -- it is a cultural zoning" -- You can say buyers should have looked into how "possible" scenarios are under "retail" --but even if they searched of the depths of city zoning, there was "no" information available on that particular development--they had to push for this once the announcement was made. They could have purchased anywhere--I don't think anyone would have paid the "top-dollar" that the family-run developer business asked only to live steps from a bar -- would you? There was was some obvious back-handed conversations happening here...this was the issue...the truth was not reported very well in the media. hmmm i wonder about the timing of Brent getting fired....with his relationships with developers in question...
I have been following this story as i live in the building opposite the brewery/restaurant and I have met alot of those people opposed to it (who by the way i found to be community-minded and progressive individuals)-- the issue is not NIMBYism, it is more against the fact that when they purchased the developer told flat out lies about what was happening-
It's not NIMBYism because these people expected a different kind of development? The rest of the neighbourhood should be denied more commercial space because of something an unscrupulous developer implied? Does not follow at all.
(Hi neighbour! I'm also steps from that development.)
Not to paint everybody with the same brush, but it reminds me of the time when new residents moved in near the Biltmore (that's been there for years) and got it shut down for a couple of weeks.
If you move into Mt Pleasant, expect to see people walking down the street, beer in hand, and expect to hear said people coming home drunk at 3 am. Expect to smell the unmistakable scent of marijuana, and expect your neighbor to play loud music (while smoking marijuana) in his apartment - my neighbour actually complained the first day he moved into my building. And definitely expect another tower to be built that is going to block your view.
I have been following this story as i live in the building opposite the brewery/restaurant and I have met alot of those people opposed to it (who by the way i found to be community-minded and progressive individuals)-- the issue is not NIMBYism, it is more against the fact that when they purchased the developer told flat out lies about what was happening--they told each buyer the same thing "artist studios and possibly some retail -- it is a cultural zoning" -- You can say buyers should have looked into how "possible" scenarios are under "retail" --but even if they searched of the depths of city zoning, there was "no" information available on that particular development--they had to push for this once the announcement was made. They could have purchased anywhere--I don't think anyone would have paid the "top-dollar" that the family-run developer business asked only to live steps from a bar -- would you? There was was some obvious back-handed conversations happening here...this was the issue...the truth was not reported very well in the media. hmmm i wonder about the timing of Brent getting fired....with his relationships with developers in question...
i think you found yourself one of the least sympathetic online forums of all for airing the "i'm not a nimby, but..." line. vancouver is already derided worldwide for being extremely boring and having ludicrously picky neighborhood types, i'm pretty sure the last thing that development enthusiasts want to hear about is your problem with this "why didn't the neighborhood change like i was promised?". sorry emcee.
Prev
Linear Mode
