• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page

Comments

Comments

Recent comments

  • Maggy Carter
    March 05, 2013 - 15:13

    I feel a little dizzy after reading Mr. Crocker's article. It's OK that he wants to register his support for a no-holds-barred approach to development in St. John's, but he should at least try to inject a little honesty and common sense into the debate. His and Stantec's notion that the removal of height restrictions means cheaper housing has no basis in fact. Real estate pricing is driven by demand factors, not costs of construction. The price of housing in St. John's has doubled in the past five years alone while costs have risen only modestly. High-rises only serve to increase land values and/or corporate profits for the developers. Also ridiculous is his assertion that low-rise buildings block more sun than high-rise. And yes Mr. Crocker, those of us who built in the city with development rules that restricted building height do have a right to those continued protections. Otherwise the city is enriching new developments at the expense of older ones. Nor do I see any evidence of "rabid anti-development activism" in this city. Equally questionable is your notion that Calgary has grown exponentially "with a fraction of our resource wealth". Clearly you lack understanding of the economic impact of the oil industry in Alberta. Despite Calgary's downtown high-rise developments (some of which city planners now regret), the city is on balance a low density -not a high density- urban environment. The city has height restrictions that were designed to protect the Bow River and other landmarks. Some of our landmarks in this city have been harmed by exemptions to building rules in the past and this would have continued had it not been for public opposition to political pandering to developers. Be careful what you wish for Mr. Crocker. Maybe when you're a little older, you might develop a better appreciation of the wisdom behind the height restrictions established for this city some years ago. In the meantime you might content yourself with some nice snaps from an eight storey Tiffany Lane condo development. And yes that might mean the developers will have to settle for a 50% versus 100% return on their investment.

  • JEDDY
    March 05, 2013 - 14:06

    Amen, brother! I agree 100%. Well said. Bravo. Couldn't have said it any better myself. It's time we stop looking into the past and start wisely planning for the future.

    • James Williams
      March 05, 2013 - 17:14

      Something tells me Ryan Crocker and your self would be against this development if it was proposed to be built in the holy grail of Downtown and the heritage area!

    • Jeddy
      March 06, 2013 - 08:57

      James Williams: You are very, very incorrect. I am incredibly pro-development, and constantly advocating for increasing height and density in our ever growing DT west-end. However, this development is not proposed there. I don't see your point.

  • More important to look back so we learn from the mistakes of our past and then plot our future more accurately.
    March 05, 2013 - 12:02

    JOJO: I can only muse myself on another level about the high rolling economy the province of Newfoundland and Labrador could be sporting along with a greatly enhanced population, had the province's natural resource base been utilized for its benefit at the time Canada took over our province in 1949. For instance the total revenue from Fish, Iron Ore, Nickel Ore, most other ores, Oil, Hydroelectricity and the Air Space Revenue and our perfect geographic location situated on the Eastern Atlantic trade routes that the whole of Canada and other parts of the World benefited from instead could very well have propelled our province into the Canadian province with the greatest economy. Shame on those Politicians and Corporate bosses who saw to it that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador would be the Cinderella of Canada despite its coveted natural resource base that instead grew the population of the rest of Canada and created great economies that propelled Canada into on of the G8 economies of the World.

  • Happily Retired
    March 05, 2013 - 11:52

    Ryan, While I'm open to more strategic development in this city, I'm baffled about your use of Calgary as an example on which we should draw. Calgary had over 100,000 people in 1948, before we even joined Canada. They had a professional football team in 1945. In 1971, around the time of the oil crisis, the population grew to over 400,000 people. Our oil resources are minor compared to Alberta's, and our development is at the embryonic stage compared to theirs. Also, I lived in Calgary and enjoyed my time there, but that city is the definition of urban sprawl.Yes, I know that big business has built numerous high rises, but the city spreads for miles and miles. Where exactly are you getting your information?

  • Disgusted and Disgruntled over what could have been.
    March 05, 2013 - 09:05

    JOJO: I can only muse myself on another level about the high rolling economy the province of Newfoundland and Labrador could be sporting along with a greatly enhanced population, had the province's natural resource base been utilized for its benefit at the time Canada took over our province in 1949. For instance the total revenue from Fish, Iron Ore, Nickel Ore, most other ores, Oil, Hydroelectricity and the Air Space Revenue and our perfect geographic location situated on the Eastern Atlantic trade routes that the whole of Canada and other parts of the World benefited from instead could very well have propelled our province into the Canadian province with the greatest economy. Shame on those Politicians and Corporate bosses who saw to it that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador would be the Cinderella of Canada despite its coveted natural resource base that instead grew the population of the rest of Canada and created great economies that propelled Canada into on of the G8 now the G21 economies of the World.

  • BC
    March 05, 2013 - 08:46

    Couldn't agree more. Let's stop being so scared of density here on the Avalon

  • JoJo
    March 05, 2013 - 08:25

    I can only pray that we never reach 1 million residents in St. John's!