Circa 1877 (née Brick Brewery) | 20 fl | Complete

[Markster]

The problem is that some of those in opposition will be very disingenuous, and throw every issue they can think of at the wall, hoping they'll stick, whether each is truly an issue for them or not. Then how are staff and the developer supposed to realistically adjust the development to make it fit better?

Yeah, when the goal is to stop the development from happening at all, this tactic basically throws out any fine-grained adjustments for things that truly matter.

Ultimately, what happens is that the development will proceed anyway, after several revisions to things that don't actually matter, but were easier to "fix", in the name of looking like they are "addressing issues".  Meanwhile, the revisions may have the effect of worsening the subject of other complaints.

A common "sticky" complaint is parking, because parking requirements are high, and written in plain language in the zoning bylaw.

1. The development asks for relief on parking requirements.
   
2. Neighbours complain there will be nuisance parking in their neighbourhood, and too much traffic.  
   
3. Staff find it easy to agree with the complaint, and don't reduce parking requirements.
   
4. The building has to incorporate more parking in redesign.  
   
5. This increases the number of cars the development supports, increasing traffic. The redesign means more blank walls hiding a larger parking garage.  Units cost more to build/rent/own.
   
6. The development is approved anyway.
   

Meanwhile, the neighbourhood is still angry because what they really cared about was the parklet that has been replaced with an uninviting concrete alley. But all attention was on parking, because that stuck. The outcome is worse for all.