Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoNerd
Ah yes, as opposed to the positive connotations of being called poor and run down. :
I’m guessing your statements are based solely on opinion, because the lack of development potential along portions of Scott have a lot more to do with the existing R1 & R3 zoning and back lanes making tower redevelopment near impossible. Parkdale North is also designated mixed-use centre. It would be shockingly unscrupulous for a SP/CDP to factor in housing costs/property value into development plans.
|
Poor is a description and in this case a description of the residents net worth. If you want to take that as an insult go right ahead but again that's on you for thinking it means something more in context
I'm stating that the literal SP accepted in 2015 which dictated the zoning for areas was influenced by those with the means and ability to participate in the consultation process to restrict that zoning to lower limits then what was dictated on areas that are poor and due to that were unable to participate in the consultation process as greatly. Usually because they could not make it to meetings for a variety of reasons. ( This isn't exactly an unknown issue with these public consultation processes, and it's not exactly unknown that CA don't represent communities in either opinion or diversity)
Root cause: lower property values, Lower protections, close enough to transit and etc means it was ripe for redevelopment.