Comment 110766

By Steve (registered) | Posted March 30, 2015 at 20:11:37 in reply to Comment 110715

"I'm not questioning your motives. I agree that we share the same goals. I suspect that we'd agree on our response to most development applications. (For example, I'm sure you'd support the BNA in its opposition to further expansion of the Hamilton General Hospital parking sprawl at Robert and Cathcart!)"

But, it's 17 surface parking spots that are forming your basis for objection.

"The Beume building across the street and the Templar Flats proposal on King William are excellent examples, in my mind, of how mid-rise and even low-rise buildings can achieve density in a downtown core."

Neither of those examples are building around a 100+ year theatre which requires funds for renovation. Also note, Beume sat on that empty lot using it for surface parking for years and part of that development footprint had a building which was demolished due to neglectful ownership. I'm not sure if he owned that building, or not.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools