08-24-2022, 10:39 AM
I suspect if it was not an election year then things may have turned out different for this and Victoria and Park. I mean the city has been specifically planning to density the downtown and transit nodes. They've also been doing a good job, approving projects of much larger size left and right.
i don't think it's truly a heritage issue for the city. I mean, look at Q Condos, right? That location has a beautiful and unique old building but they approved the condo, saving only the facade. I think this is just council pandering to NIMBYs to hold onto their seats. Which may, in the most frustrating way, be good in the sense that they are generally pro-development and could easily be unseated by someone who specifically panders to NIMBYs all the time. We don't need anyone like that on council.
Who knows. Hopefully the OLT can step in and save this...same goes for Victoria and Park. There's also that 25 floor building proposed beside that project (between Victoria and Park and Garment Street) that could face the same fate, so hopefully these things go through the right channels and get built.
i don't think it's truly a heritage issue for the city. I mean, look at Q Condos, right? That location has a beautiful and unique old building but they approved the condo, saving only the facade. I think this is just council pandering to NIMBYs to hold onto their seats. Which may, in the most frustrating way, be good in the sense that they are generally pro-development and could easily be unseated by someone who specifically panders to NIMBYs all the time. We don't need anyone like that on council.
Who knows. Hopefully the OLT can step in and save this...same goes for Victoria and Park. There's also that 25 floor building proposed beside that project (between Victoria and Park and Garment Street) that could face the same fate, so hopefully these things go through the right channels and get built.