Hey, Tim Banks: piss off!

Unfortunately Kim wasn’t looking out for “the interests of me and my neighbours” last night. At least that’s how me and my neighbours feel. She moved the resolution that sank our battleship.

Ok. I’m by no stretch of the imagination a fan of Tim Banks. He’s talks the big talk…and in some aspects that annoys the hell out of me. On the other hand, I’m not a fan of Kim Divine and this “let’s keep our down-town quaint” junk. It’s downtown folks. Downtown of a CAPITAL city. The notion of “let’s not let an office building destroy our pristine view” doesn’t fly with me. Instead…should we just shove everything to the outskirts as a big box store? And before you think i’m only generalizing Kim Divine on this one issue, let me dip back to the “night club” issue. It seems to me that Kim didn’t want all that “boistrous downtown” entertainment ruining her good night’s sleep. So she felt it neccessary to quell the noise of an institution I’m betting was there longer than she was. Again….some news for you. It’s DOWNTOWN. If you don’t enjoy the noise, I would suggest you relocate to a quieter part. I’ve lived in downtown locations and this activity is the norm. Should we move all downtown buildings/events/spots/nightclubs up to the big box stores? Let’s move ahead folks.

I suppose I was really trying to make two points at the same time: First, it’s Councillor Devine’s duty to have an “obstructionist attitude,” especially when faced with self-interested developers. For Mr. Banks to suggest that she is incompetent or ill-willed for representing her constituents is ill-mannered. Second, I don’t happen to agree with Tim Banks’ vision for my neigbourhood, nor his suggestion that those than disagree with his vision are, of necessity, regressive. As to Jason and Marc’s points: I think there more to objecting to having an $8 million office tower contructed at the foot of your street than “let’s not let an office building destroy our pristine view.” Charlottetown may be the CAPITAL city, but it is not Toronto or Halifax, and it has a unique character. I think it’s possible to be sensitive, innovative and, dare I say, “embracing of change” without keeping the downtown locked up in a quaint ye olde lockbox.

Banks learned his “give me what I want or else I’ll pull out” skills from others (remember Mary Jean and the box factory?). It is probably the most effective business strategy on PEI. Only when there is a strong long term vision for both the city of Charlottetown and Province as a whole can Islanders tell arrogant big-fish-in-the-small-ponders like Banks to piss off with his schoolyard bullying.

“vote him off the Island” Gee, can Islanders really do that? Lots of people use the argument that if you don’t agree with them, you are against progress, backward etc. It is a tired approach used by those with a weak argument or suffering from frustration about not getting their way. But, is Charlottetown open for business or not? It seems this represents a big difference between the cities of Charlottetown and Summerside.

I can understand that some people (50) do not want this development in the downtown area. What about the rest of the people is Kim Devine’s distirct?? If it is such a huge problem then show up for the meeting. Its the same mentality that those have taken against the Jack Frost Festival…”something good for the city shouldn’t happen.”

So, Wayne, you think we should just supend any by-laws, turn Charlottetown over to the developers for unrestricted development, and everything will be a whole lot better? Let them build what they want, where they want, and to hell with anything or anyone else?

I dont’t want to answer for Wayne, but I think his point is that we (Charlottetown) need Developers more than they need us. Why can alot of people not see this?

It always makes me sad when these discussions turn into personal slagging matches. I think everyone with an idea about this city has something valuable to contribute but it has been my experience that people are in too much of a hurry to personalize their disagreements, I have been trying to attend meetings lately that discuss the future of Charlottetown. But i find that, as soon as someone pipes up with an idea, someone else calls them an idiot. Not their idea - them. It would be so refreshing to hear a discussion of the city as a whole that didn’t involve any insults. Of anyone.

Tim Banks needed to be called out on his tantrum in the Guardian, because that’s what it was. Good for you, Peter.

I don’t see what the big fuss is. So he wants to build a building on the waterfront. The main complaint I’m hearing is that it will block the view. Charlottetown has plenty of green space on its waterfront. If you like the view, just walk 100 meters to Confederation Landing park. Surely the building will look nicer than the gravel pile that’s there now. Or would you prefer we put the oil tanks and railroad tracks back in? Some people complain that the building is too tall. There are plenty of 5-story buildings in Charlottetown. And the fact that it’s taller means it will block less of the view, since its footprint will be smaller. I’d also like to point out that we’ve got a 12-story hotel on our waterfront already, just a couple of blocks away, so it’s not like scale is an issue.

I am sure that Vancouver had plenty of green space on its waterfront, too, when the first tall buildings were built there. Once things start, though, it’s hard to put the brakes on unless there is a comprehensive plan in place. The “strips” leading into most cities, such as our own fine example on University Avenue, show what happens when development proceeds without a plan. Once Mr. Banks gets the initial foothold on the waterfront, he and other developers will find a way to fill it with rentable space, undoubtedly to the expense of (unrentable) parks, common areas and views of the water.

Downtown revitalization occurs only when a high density of people LIVE DOWNTOWN. It has been found that a large conentration of office space and parking lots works against this as does lots of noise and anti social behaviour. Downtown Charlottetown will become vital when lots of people live here. If you go to St Henri in Montreal you will see how this works. A developer converted a large factory into lofts - many young creative people moved in - cafes thrived more lofts were developed - resatuarants and food shopping moved in - more upscale places were built - the SAQ moved in - the canal was cleaned up and boating began in the summer - the bright young things began to be priced out and the losts were upgraded and so on. This is what happened in downtown Manhatten. All attempts to jump start it by moving business there failed. I get so angry when those who claim to want revitalization a. Dont read - Hello Jane Jacobs has been writing about this for 40 years!!!! b. Don’t do any research

Where is the forum for discussion like this one to occur, other than here? Not that there’s anything wrong with here…but it doesn’t get us any farther than -um - here.

I smell another QSC debate….

Filling vacant buildings would be nice Cyn. Are we now going to tell devlopers they must fill vacant buildings before anything else is built? What is the incentive?

Well, for one reason…many of the buildings we already have downtown are protected by the heritage nazi’s and do not suit what people want in their office space, or provide adequate parking for those who have fled to the freedom of the suburbs or have seen property taxes soar because of the shrinking overall tax base downtown…a result of represive business policies of Charlottetown. Meanwhile, lower Manhattan is so driven to provide office space, it is enduring an emotional debate about how much space will be allocated to a 9-11 memorial. While not everyone needs to agree with Tim Banks’ vision for the neighborhood, nor his suggestion that those than disagree with his vision are, of necessity, regressive, I would offer a twist and say it is Councilor Devine’s duty to have an “obstructionist attitude,” especially when faced with self-interested minority groups of 50 or less. She was elected to represent the wishes of the majority of the electorate, or face the boot in the next election. Most politicians who support self-interest minorities usually suffer the same fate. And people who voice the opinion that their self-interest group knows what is right for the majority should be cautious, because it might get them elected. Faced with reality of responsibility, what would they do then?

And as Cynthia mention we here at the Queen Street Commons are most interested in hosting this discussion (or a series) in real life. Face to face. We could even get both sides to work together towards a solution, write up a white paper and submit it to the city. Or something like that…

As Alan points out, the Offical Plan is the important document. It’s the Constitution, so to speak, to the Bylaws legislation. The bylaws must conform. This was part of the argument over my neighbourhood’s recent issue with a developer. The problem is getting the city to recognize this fact. The chairman of the planning committee nor the mayor are able to recall one development that was ever denied because it was inconsistent with the principles or objectives of Charlottetown’s Official Plan. This is sad. For your information, the city is currently reviewing and updating the development bylaws and the official plan as part of a mandated five year requirement. Stage one is complete and the three public meetings were very poorly attended. The process continues but you must speak up now.

I don’t want a “more peaceful downtown.” Beyond wanting a downtown where the peace and security of my family is considered (i.e. fewer drunken teens trying to break our door down after a night out on the town), my only priority is that the degree of “impeace” (is that a word?) is determined by some local consensus and not by the whims of the tourismocrats and developers. And I refuse to subscribe to the developer mantra that “if you don’t grow you die.” There’s nothing wrong with standing still, moving backwards, moving sideways, etc. if it improves the quality of life of the citizenry.

Just a point Alan - there isn’t a restaurant (except in the summer) within five blocks of the proposed APM HQ. The closest one is probably Tim Horton’s by the bridge. Plus APM is planning to have a cafe for the tenants. And APM would get significant tax breaks by building their “innovation centre”. So all in all there would not be a big greater benefit to the community. You can’t make anyone live downtown because they work there and it wouldn’t be especially easy to nip downtown to shop at lunchtime. The DVA people may shop and eat downtown at lunchtime, but how many stay downtown after work or come downtown on Saturday or live downtown? Building a building on the waterfront just means you have a building on the waterfront and that’s all it means. I would like a city with many more young people in it…it would make the whole city a lot more fun - even for The Old like myself. And if I could be convinced that building a five storey office building (one storey of which will be occupied by APM btw) would accomplish that, I would seriously rethink my opposition to the proposal.

I think of Harborside as an example of non-highrise waterfront development that I appreciate: lots of public access to the water, lowrise buildings in harmony with buildings around them, etc. I think of the Delta Hotel as an example of the ultimate extend of Things Gone Wrong on the waterfront.

You can see the plans the Harbour Authority has for that space at shawnmurphy.ca You need Power Point.

Why the hell is the city allowing any developer to build in an area that flooded in the 2000 storm surge, and is predicted by Environment Canada and Natural Resources Canada to flood at to least 1-2 metres in depth on average every 20 years? I don’t care if you believe in greenhouse gases and whether humans have caused it and all the political bally-hoo that goes on with that, but this much we do know: 1) the earth is on a warming trend and ocean and air temps are increasing 2) the ice-in period in the Gulf of St. Lawrence is declining, freeing more open water for… 3) increased winter storms and extra-tropical cyclones 4) PEI is still undergoing glacial and is depressing at 0.3 metres per century 5) global sea levels have risen 0.1 metres per century in the past and are expected to reach 0.5-0.7 metres in THIS CENTURY ALONE 6) couple the chance of a high tide, with higher sea levels, with a big-ass low pressure system and downtown Charlottetown floods, again 7) the entire area of the rail yards, and anything south of Water St., east of Cumberland and south of Grafton St. (east end) is all INFILLED LAND that came from the field out by UPEI. Back at the turn of the century, 10,000 railcar loads of earth were hauled down there, and it’s not even compacted - the sewer system in that entire area fills with sea water every 6 hours, plus they’ve measured with survey-quality GPS that the entire waterfront rises and falls an imperceptible several centimetres with every tide. Whey you would put buildings on this, is beyond me. Why did we allow Founders Hall to be developed by CADC and ACOA with millions of our $ when it’s a threatened flood zone and on infilled land? Pork-barrel politics by Liberal-Tory asses - that’s why. Why we allow ANY waterfront development on this island is crazy, given the susceptibility to erosion and flood damage on our shores (and no, I’m not trying to be an environmentalist and stick my head in the sand - this is the reality folks, so check your ideological arguments at the door). Then, why this province is so far behind the rest of the nation in even adopting the National Building Code of Canada, or any other regulations is beyond me.