Letter - It’s not about tax revenue

I would like to respond to William Adams' supposition that the city bases its approval for high density development on the tax revenue to be gained. As someone who has spent decades involved with land use planning as a neighbourhood activist, Advisory Planning Commission member and City Councillor, I can state unequivocally that in the countless development requests in which I've been involved, never once did the potential tax revenue enter in to the discussion. After high rises started appearing in James Bay in the early 1970's, residents organized to let the city know they were not acceptable. Not long before the city had established it's Planning Department, which worked, with input from with residents, to develop neighbourhood land use plans, which were subsequently rolled in to the city's Official Community Plan. These plans specify the density (this is a combination of height, volume and site coverage) for every property in the city. If an owner or developer wants to build something that is inconsistent with what is allowed, they are required to go through an arduous application process. This process includes notification and consultation with the neighbours. The Duet site at 640 Michigan was a parking lot. Dave Chard bought the property with the intent to build condominiums. He presented many concepts for a single tower and two towers, of various heights. Many meetings were held with the James Bay Neighbourhood Association to hammer out acceptable setbacks, height and configuration on the site. The development may not meet everyone's approval, but everyone got to have their say. The question of tax potential was not part of the discussion.

Pieta VanDyke