[S-Man]

"Unambitious backwater town" is the image Ottawa has been trying to shake for decades, with various successes and failures. At least we're no longer a miltary camp at the edge of the frontier like in the early 1800s.

You're right that there are sightline (viewplane) policies that apply to Parliament Hill, though given the amount of urban development over the decades, this rarely comes into play during development proposals. A friend once had a 13 floor apartment a kilometer south of Parliament Hill, and the view was a solid wall of 20-plus storey buildings with the flag on top of the Peace Tower sticking up above that line. Yeah, some heritage view. Anyways,all the places you normally see it from are usually waterfront parks that are protected anyway.

I used to have to attend these development proposal (community consultation) meetings as part of my job, and the first place I'd go after leaving was a bar to have a stiff drink. I wanted to strangle some of the NIMBY protesters in the audience because their entitlement filled me with rage. But, that is what you can expect.

I must say - because in terms of planning Halifax looks a lot like Ottawa of 5-10 years ago - thatthe community benefit aspect of new urban development needs to be made known to people. Our last city council (2006-2011) couldn't decide how to tie its own shoelaces, and as a result, NIMBYs held the reigns of many councillors and planning committee meetings dragged on for hours (over a 3-storey building in a "heritage" area).

With the latest council, many of the old (and I should add, socialist-leaning and NIMBY-pandering) councillors got the boot and only a single stalwart remained. The intensification policy adopted by the previous council was explained better, and the city just recently passed 'Section 37', which makes the developer pay for "community benefits" in return for the approval of a project 25% higher (or more) of existing zoning.

While there is still plenty of strife, and NIMBYs never really go away, there has been a big increase in urban density, and a new plan for transit-oriented-development around the 13 stations that will make up a east-west light rail line. How that will pan out remains to be seen, but progress is being made due in part to showing people how their city will benefit, dropping a few dinosaur councillors, and enacting Section 37.

I never once bought the idea that 'heritage' means nothing new should ever go near an old building, lest it appear less old. That's just ridiculous. Functioning urban neighbourhoods should not be museums in the strict sense of the word, nor should they become ghost towns (thus wasting valuable urban land).

Even in Quebec City, which I spent time in last fall, there was noticeable (although very careful) development in the uppertown area, and more in the lowertown area. If they can infill at greater heights in the old areas and much greater heights in the less-old areas (St-Roch, St-Foy), than any city can do it.