Even I don't always agree with my opinion

 

The Wall Of Horror

0
Posted October 18, 2011 by jim young in Politics

– jim young

I don’t have a problem with do-gooders doing good.

It’s a good thing.

But when do-gooders appeal to public emotions and start to gloss over some of the real issues, I start to have a problem with that.

That’s not really doing good.

Such is the case of the opposition of the proposed rezoning of “the vacant waterfront lot on Dunlop St. between Poyntz and Berczy St. (the old Lakeview Dairy Site)” in Barrie.

The following is taken from the text of an email I received that was sent in the hopes of gaining my support for the opposition.

Firstly, the site is currently zoned to a height of 30 meters (the height of the Flamengo at the foot of Berczy St). The developer, on behalf of the owner, is seeking a re-zoning of the site to 46 meters (the height of the Bayshore Landings on Dunlop between Mulcaster and Poyntz St.)

Secondly, the re-zoning meeting is scheduled for Monday October 24th during the regular City Hall Meeting. The public can speak at this meeting, but the public doesn’t know about the meeting.

Thirdly, if this rezoning is approved, it will allow development on the old Cotty’s Cleaners site to a maximum of at least 46 m. The parcel of land where Hooters and Mac’s are located will be developed into condos as well to a minimum height of 46m.

Result: a corridor of condos on Barrie’s waterfront stretching from Berczy St. to Mulcaster St. No one will see the water! The shadows these buildings will throw will be a totally different issue.

Nowhere in the email does the opposition suggest that this development be stopped. Because like any good capitalist that believes in free-enterprise we don’t want to stop progress.

And yet the suggestion is made that this zoning change “will restrict the waterfront views and benefits to an elite few.”

What I’d like to know is who are these people that are going to be affected by the extra top 16 meters?

I’m guessing the top 16 meters might affect an elite few that live on the top of the hill in the area of the Knights Of Columbus Hall. And if the opposition is in defence of their right to the view of the lake then that’s a different matter.

But if this is the case, why are these people any more deserving of their view of the lake being obstructed than all the other people whose view is going to be obstructed by the first 30 meters?

So is the opposition just an attempt to punish the developers who are going to build a 30 foot “Wall of Horror” anyway?

The question of the “shadows these buildings will throw” is yet another blatant attempt to use fear and emotion to prompt people into action. As I understand it, the “wall of horror” will basically run east to west. And as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west – what exactly is their concern?

Who exactly is going to be left in the shadows by 46 meter buildings that won’t already be left in the shadows of 30 meter buildings?

In an attachment that accompanied the email and almost as an afterthought – the opposition also points out:

In addition, the developer wants a strip of the public park
immediately west of the site to allow for vehicle access to their
underground parking garage.

Just as they did with the statements such as “no one will see the water” and “The shadows these buildings will throw…” the opposition seems to be using this as a scare tactic.

Yet this is probably their only legitimate protest. What right does City Hall have to sell any of its parklands without the express permission of the owners – the tax payers?

So why isn’t this issue the main focus of the opposition? It doesn’t look like they have the balls to really take on the “Wall of Horror” and try to stop the virtual wall that these condos will create.

So why are they wasting their time and energy bickering about the height?

The opposition here would be well advised to stop chasing windmills and stick to the real dragons.

– 30 –


0 Comments



Be the first to comment!


Leave a Response