Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P.
Utterly ridiculous but unsurprising given our new anti-development council. Zurawski said anything taller than what was already there was "Too TALL!!!!".
I suppose whatever stubby sawed-off structure eventually gets approved for here will require red-brick cladding and faux-Victorian styrofoam cornices.
|
It's funny that pro-skyscraper folks are all like "council is anti-development," whereas groups like the Willow Tree people are instead "Council is corrupt and in the pocket of big developers!"
Anyway, Zurawkski's height-phobia was a bit ridiculous. I don't know much about the guy be didn't impress yesterday. I did think Lindell Smith was great. He basically said that people asking for the development process to be stopped were barking up the wrong tree.
I do think this is the best outcome. A 29-storey building is absolutely and IMO obviously fitting for this site (I'd be fine with even taller) but the Centre Plan will stipulate 20 storeys max. The current zoning is only 10, so sending this to a public consultation at 20 storeys in anticipation of the new plan seems like the right decision. Otherwise it's like we're granting Centre Plan exemptions before the thing is even in place, and we spiral down the rabbit hole again of uncertainty around the rules and out-of-scale proposals and NIMBY opposition again. i really hope that the Centre Plan ends or at least discourages this combative propose-oppose, propose-oppose dichotomy we've got going on. Once it's in place,
maybe developers will keep their proposals within its limits. And
maybe NIMBY busybodies will be discouraged from protesting when they have no leg to stand on, as will be the case with The Willow Tree people and their "10-storeys max" talk once the Centre Plan is the law of the land (soon, soon?)
I do think a 20-storey height limit outside of downtown is frankly dumb, and I'm curious as to the rationale behind it, but if it means we can start building and stop bickering, let's go.
Threaded Mode