One Hundred | 21 & 17 fl | U/C

[zanate]

Perhaps the Arthur St owner is objecting to the apparent "First-come, First-serve" attitude that the neighbouring developer seems to have. The objection seems to be, to paraphrase, "Why is my neighbour able to push the boundaries to make more money when there is a possibility that it will later limit my ability to do the same".

As long as there is ability to accommodate the development and the City staff has exercised due diligence, I'm not sure how anything other than "First come, First served" could apply. This is why I asked a while back whether the objections of the adjoining property owner based on his hypothetical ability to develop his property were even a consideration? I'm not aware of anything official that would have prevented him from developing his property at any time prior to Momentum's applications, so I'm not sure I feel for him.

I see both your points. But given that a developer can only push the limits of zoning with the City's consent, neighbour concerns need to be carefully considered by the city, whether they're "It'll shade my back yard and kill my begonias" or "I may want to build up this property soon and I'll be constrained by these variances."

After all, zoning rules are in place in part to protect the interests of other stakeholders, especially neighbours.