One vote for view cones. I have trouble understanding how people can't see this.
The thing is that view cones were a compromise offered by developers of high rises in order to gain relaxed overall height limitations. They were allowed to build taller buildings in some areas in return for creating/respecting view cones in other locations. Now they want to break that covenant and fill in the view cones.
Thanks for raising this Brian. Simply put, ‘why would Vancouverites want to compete with Manhattan for skyscrapers?’ They can’t compete with us for mountain views. Do what you do best. Developers could care less and are just trying to cash in. Tell them to go to Manhattan to cash in.
One vote for view cones. I have trouble understanding how people can't see this.
The thing is that view cones were a compromise offered by developers of high rises in order to gain relaxed overall height limitations. They were allowed to build taller buildings in some areas in return for creating/respecting view cones in other locations. Now they want to break that covenant and fill in the view cones.
Thanks for keeping the issue alive.
Rod, you are most welcome. Yes, it seems impossible for folks to realize that height exceptions are “first of many “ rather than “last one.”
Thanks for raising this Brian. Simply put, ‘why would Vancouverites want to compete with Manhattan for skyscrapers?’ They can’t compete with us for mountain views. Do what you do best. Developers could care less and are just trying to cash in. Tell them to go to Manhattan to cash in.
Richard, sadly, I agree with you on all counts. Take care, and thanks for reading.