Quote:
Originally Posted by DigitalNinja
I think the design is unique and ok, I just wish it made better use of the land area around it. This is HRM's fault for not approving the original proposal though.
|
Planning is about compromise, especially on projects where there is controversy. The fact that anything got approved at all on this site; considering the opposition to the original approval is a miracle.
In situations where I've dealt with projects like this; the emphasis should be placed on getting a reasonably compromised project approved in order to provide context to another development down the road. For example: If you had an area that had mainly 2 storey single family homes and someone consolidated a number of lots and proposed a 15 storey building - you may get a lot of opposition. So you compromise and bring the height of the building down and say it gets approved at 8 storeys? Not what everyone wants; but it gets approved.
A few years down the road; the same (or a different) developer consolidates more lots and proposes a 15 storey building. There may still be opposition; but then you have the context of the approved building to say; well 8 is pretty tall; so lets go slightly more. It may result in a compromise of say 12 storeys or the 15 storey may get approved; but you take small steps forward to the desired level.
I don't remember the report and how it was written, but typically when the planner writes up their report they talk about the context of the neighbourhood. I know the planner who did this project; she's pretty good about those write ups. Ultimately; context may not always save a project. Look at the church site by the Hydrostone? Most of the buildings that have gone up around there are in the 7 to 8 storey range; so going above 10 would seem to be the 'next logical step'; but that doesn't look like it's going to happen.
Sometimes communities (regardless of what compromises you make) won't want to accept change. So; you have to just try to get something and see what happens? As disappointing as some of believe the compromise is (believe me; I'm a fighter; so I would've wanted to take the original proposal forward); sometimes it's better not to die on the hill. Besides; if the applicant decided to make the compromise; sometimes the planners don't have a choice - it's what the applicant wants.