Originally Posted by Keith P.
I've read through it all and my feeling now is one of overwhelming disappointment.
Actually... I'm very pro-development and most of what you disagree with... I agree with! My main issue is with the ridiculous 65M limit.
Barrington is historic and SHOULD be kept more or less as-is. Restored and revived... yes... but not demolished or built up.
And the street grid should absolutely be restored at Cogswell... otherwise, what is the point of taking it down? The idea is to stitch the city back together again.
And what's wrong with having provisions for biking?
And parking lots, esp. surface parking lots, are downtown killers. Surely though there must be requirements for underground parking no? How can you put up a large building and now provide parking?
I agree that the height limits are far too restrictive. I'm very disappointed with that aspect.
I agree that brick pavers are pretty but completely insane and impractical. Have we learned nothing from those horrible pavers we put in in the 80's? Unless the "technology" has improved... they should be avoided.
I agree that the idea of the building in the Superstore parking lot is also crazy. I've been aware of that idea. When I first heard it I was thinking... what?! How is that gonna work? I can imagine Loblaws wanting to hide their building and lose half their parking lot... not to mention their new gas station. Nice idea... yes... but impractical.
The rest... I agree with.