Developer Task Force An ‘Outrage’: THE VOTER
So the members of thee Housing Innovation Task Force were selected to ensure broad representation of the development industry – in other words, those who will benefit most from loosening of regulations and requirements, Quelle surprise.
Where is the representation of the residents of the city? There is only one voice for the non-profit sector – are we really supposed to believe they will be listened to? I note that the Taggart has a rep at the table. As the developer of Tewin, it has a huge conflict of interest. The other developers also are in conflict but not as much as Tewin/Taggart.
As a minimum, in proposing any slackening of current requirements, the proponents should have to explain the rationale in the creation of those restrictions on developers. Why were these restrictions put in place to begin with? In many cases, it’s because the development industry is not known for supporting or following any measure that reduces their profits.
The restrictions, to be blunt, were deliberately enacted to prevent the developers from doing whatever they want regardless of the effect on the city or its residents.
This initiative is an outrage and should be cancelled. It is not capable, because of its composition, of working to benefit the city and/or its residents. Stop it now.
The Voter is a respected community activist and long-time Bulldog commenter who prefers to keep her identity private.
For You:
Cyclists Get Tough With Drivers
I Will Debate Lansdowne: SARAVANAMUTOO
ByWard Market: Watson For Nightlife Commish
Stop Virtue-Signaling Voters, Freeland Says: QUOTABLE
Bookmark The Bulldog, click here
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
– The Bulldog – News Feed Enter 
Madame Voter, April 1st has come and gone … Oh! You aren’t joking. In that case, Mayor Mark Sutcliffe is definitely closing in on being a one term Mayor.
This obvious case of “developeritis” is one for both the books and the garbage can.
Great article! As one that has worked in a highly regulated safety sensitive industry it is sad to see “disruptive” initiatives by politicians and industry. Politicians that reduce “red tape” are often guilty of working against the public interest. Every regulation/rule is a result of something in the past. Nobody creates regulations to be a pain to industry, rather it is a reaction of pain inflicted by industry on society. I agree, explain why a rule exists before going further.
Just another in a long list of bad ideas coming from city hall, but I am sure that appropriate public consultation took place before the foxes were put in charge of the developmental chicken coop!