Quote:
Originally Posted by Good Baklava
Council is not just focused on peninsula development; Mill Cove, Wright’s Cove, Shannon Park, Seton Ridge, and Lovett Lake are all large-scale projects whose developers have barely touched a shovel. Even King’s Wharf isn’t close to halfway completed.
As for the wilderness areas, anything worth protecting can’t possibly survive in smaller parks. Habitat fragmentation is a primary culprit threatening SAR. Growth can still occur along corridors leading downtown. Not every city’s footprint is perfectly radial, nor should it be. Take my word, Haligonians of tomorrow will be happy not to have a sea of Mississauga-like suburbs.
Sure, young street makes it harder for drivers, but easier for transit users. Transit projects are land development projects as well. Much of the development along Robie and Young has been expedited by transit improvement.
|
Many of those areas you have mentioned are not approved yet or are majority apartments/condo's.
Mill Cove is complete and nothing in the pipeline beyond a vision for a fast ferry and a few waterfront townhouses U/C that are super high priced.
Wright's cove is mostly condo's/apartments, the condo fees being charged there combined with the price make them unattractive to buyers and they had a difficult time selling them. (Same goes for Kings Wharf condo's)
Shannon park is a vision and doesn't even have a proper plan yet.
Seton ridge again is mostly apartments with a few homes.
Lovett Lake is going through the planning process now.
The only one of those developments that would appeal to the majority of people looking for a house is Lovett Lake.
Not everyone wants to live in Condo's or apartments. It really isn't the cultural norm here like it is in other countries.
What is needed is a dense suburb development with a lot of mixed use, apartments and homes. Apartment buildings should all have underground parking to maximize space use and density (Not like the surface parking in Bedford West that has resulted in some apartments being spaced way out.
Planning rules increase costs for developers and results in "Higher quality appearance" I say that because the homes that are being built are structurally not worth the prices they are asking for them.
There is no reason that a 1800-2000 sq ft new home cannot be built for somewhere between $300-$400k There is super high demand for new homes around the city. Take a look at Bedford West on viewpoint in the new area that quite literally just opened up. Almost everything is sold and there are 11 new homes pending right now.
Don't get me wrong I'm not asking for silly suburbs like Glen Arbour or other such places that are a waste of space. I am asking for a dense multi use development that is smartly designed with affordable homes. Which there seems to be not only resistance from developers wanting to make more money but also planning rules and lengthy approval time from council.