Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith P.
This kind of planner attitude is why developers go nuts trying to deal with HRM Planning. Micro-management, dogma, superior attitudes. Meanwhile the empty lots continue to stagnate.
|
How is Sam's comment micro-management, dogma, or superior attitude? He's not questioning the extra floor, he's questioning HRM's lame criteria.
The theory behind density bonusing is that society accepts a development that pushes the boundaries* and in exchange the developer provides something for the public good. It's a pretty damn huge stretch to say sustainable building practices are a public good. Well, they are in a global sense, but not a direct public good to the people being affected by the development. Mostly, sustainable building practices are a good for the developer. So giving them bonus density is a double reward. It shouldn't be in the list of acceptable contributions in exchange for bonus density.
Even if we do accept that exemplary sustainable building practices are a public good deserving of bonus density, it's a pretty huge joke to say that LEED Silver is exemplary. They basically get that just by building in a core area on a bus route. We should at least be looking for LEED Platinum or equivalent, or else density bonusing is just a farce and why bother having it at all?
*admittedly the development in this case isn't exactly a huge imposition on society, but Sam's critique isn't focused on this development specifically.
Prev
Linear Mode
