What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    24
Foolworm said:
It's infuriating because there are literally no other restaurants (the Red Ox Inn is gone too) in a 2 km radius. Literally have to go to Whyte unless you call for delivery.
Click to expand...
Duggans & Bulgogi house I think are within 2 km, but I totally understand your point and frustration with this.
 
I talked to a city planner about this site when we were doing the district plannjng.

I told them to go to council with a bid to buy the whole strathearn heights parcel. I am
so tired of the city taking on all these high risk parcels of land with site remediation and social issues. I said buy it and parcel it out with restrictions Nd build timelines. Be Bold like Calgary and stop p**** footing around. This site and owner have been nothing but a bunch of (insert multiple swear words) We literally built them an LRT, if that wasnt enough incentive buy the whole dam thing.
 
Yeggy said:
I talked to a city planner about this site when we were doing the district plannjng.

I told them to go to council with a bid to buy the whole strathearn heights parcel. I am
so tired of the city taking on all these high risk parcels of land with site remediation and social issues. I said buy it and parcel it out with restrictions Nd build timelines. Be Bold like Calgary and stop p**** footing around. This site and owner have been nothing but a bunch of (insert multiple swear words) We literally built them an LRT, if that wasnt enough incentive buy the whole dam thing.
Click to expand...
Yup, Nearctic is a joke.
 
Foolworm said:
It's infuriating because there are literally no other restaurants (the Red Ox Inn is gone too) in a 2 km radius. Literally have to go to Whyte unless you call for delivery.
Click to expand...
Well now we can have the best food truck festival ever… in this gravel lot… next to a billion dollar train we built for it.

Btw someone was asking why start the redevelopment here? this site is to house the community amenities for the other buildings. Also, i suspect, best opportunity for relocation of existing tenants.
 
scyeg said:
How can the city possibly be okay with this?! Just mind-boggling stuff.
Click to expand...
Because this city falls for the same thing over and over and over and over and over again.

Strathearn Heights, BMO tower, Emerald tower, J123, Bateman Lands, to name a few where the city falls for this Charlie Brown process of allowing demolition permits with no contingency then the developer leaves the sites in poor or abandoned condition resulting in the city crying that it cant enforce all of the vacant lots that it allows in the first place.

Its almost laughable how this continues to happen.

Fix the process. Stop allowing demolition without building permits. There are several other solutions that people we pay tax money to should be coming up with. This is just lazy at this point.
 
CaptainBL said:
Because this city falls for the same thing over and over and over and over and over again.

Strathearn Heights, BMO tower, Emerald tower, J123, Bateman Lands, to name a few where the city falls for this Charlie Brown process of allowing demolition permits with no contingency then the developer leaves the sites in poor or abandoned condition resulting in the city crying that it cant enforce all of the vacant lots that it allows in the first place.

Its almost laughable how this continues to happen.

Fix the process. Stop allowing demolition without building permits. There are several other solutions that people we pay tax money to should be coming up with. This is just lazy at this point.
Click to expand...
I've hit my limit...
 
CaptainBL said:
Because this city falls for the same thing over and over and over and over and over again.

Strathearn Heights, BMO tower, Emerald tower, J123, Bateman Lands, to name a few where the city falls for this Charlie Brown process of allowing demolition permits with no contingency then the developer leaves the sites in poor or abandoned condition resulting in the city crying that it cant enforce all of the vacant lots that it allows in the first place.

Its almost laughable how this continues to happen.

Fix the process. Stop allowing demolition without building permits. There are several other solutions that people we pay tax money to should be coming up with. This is just lazy at this point.
Click to expand...
what can we do?
 
davcocom said:
what can we do?
Click to expand...
A very good question. While I also find this situation frustrating, there are no easy answers. The city absolutely cannot decide at this point they are unhappy with an individual developer's decision and try to take action against them. That type of reactionary thinking will not create a business-friendly environment when no one knows what the rules are until Council decides it doesn't like something. I'm also not sure how that would be legal, unless there is a specific municipal bylaw the developer is contravening (maintenance?).

I also don't know how a general prohibition on demolitions would work across the city. You can't write laws to target one person (or at least you shouldn't). So would homeowners be prohibited from bringing down an old house without being ready to start new construction immediately? What about properties in unsafe/unsanitary condition? Would a rule only apply to condo projects and would that discourage this type of development? How do you deal with changes in the market after demolition has started?

Writing laws is hard and while I am sure there are options out there, it is fantasy to believe that no one in charge cares or that the problem can be easily snapped out of existence.
 
I don't think that no one in charge cares, but I believe it is really not a priority for them.

I have heard more than once that the city (or another level of government) "can do anything about ...", but when sufficient public pressure occurs they somehow figure out how to do it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top