My guess is that the city has noted the fact that the OMB decision reads like the opinions and musings of the adjudicator, and makes no reference whatsoever to the city's secondary plan.
Hardly a nimby? The man single-handedly crusaded against nightclubs eventually leading to the demise of North America's largest concentration of clubs and bars. He's the definition of a nimby, a retiree nimby.
Being a nimby isn't just being against development...
By the way, he's elected by the ward residents and not by nightclub owners. If you check the stats, he won his election by a very wide margin. Sorry to see that the mere concentration of nightclubs is the only thing that makes it on your radar when regarding the value of an elected councillor. Many of us who actually live in this ward think otherwise.
Maybe you should come down here and actually see the amount of development taking place. It's good to have a councillor with an intent of making sure that there is sensible development.
By the way, he's elected by the ward residents and not by nightclub owners. If you check the stats, he won his election by a very wide margin. Sorry to see that the mere concentration of nightclubs is the only thing that makes it on your radar when regarding the value of an elected councillor. Many of us who actually live in this ward think otherwise.
Maybe you should come down here and actually see the amount of development taking place. It's good to have a councillor with an intent of making sure that there is sensible development.
Let's see...from the online bible - urban dictionary - NIMBY:someone who opposes anything built right by where they live.
I believe Adam Vaughan has the highest concentration of new development in all of North America in his ward. So, if he was a nimby, that would be illogical wouldn't it.
You obviously know very little about what is going on in his ward in terms of development and the mixed use he actually promotes. Again, you are fixated on clubs.
Well, the "Cancel Transit City" biline says all we need to know about the level of understanding of urban issues being brought to bear here, doesn't it?
Let's see...from the online bible - urban dictionary - NIMBY:someone who opposes anything built right by where they live.
I believe Adam Vaughan has the highest concentration of new development in all of North America in his ward. So, if he was a nimby, that would be illogical wouldn't it.
You obviously know very little about what is going on in his ward in terms of development and the mixed use he actually promotes. Again, you are fixated on clubs.
Well, the "Cancel Transit City" biline says all we need to know about the level of understanding of urban issues being brought to bear here, doesn't it?
Again a short google news search gives me numerous articles on NIMBYs and nightclubs.. This one sounds like ours:
North Beach may not be popular with San Francisco locals, but its nightlife certainly attracts patrons and their dollars to the City.
However, neighborhood resident Frank Therre isn't happy about what he perceives as a dangerous scene on a typical weekend night.
So he and others have put together ResidentsCentral.com in the hopes of getting citizens to band together and call for stricter regulations on clubs, and generally meddle at City Hall on behalf of NIMBYs citywide.
Man some of you need to get a life... Aggressive bunch of wankers aren't you?
There is far more to this neighbourhood than nightclubs. Maybe you should be introduced to some business owners who don't want to locate in the area because of the belief that it is some monoculture club zone.
With all the residential development taking place, the days of the poorly-managed clubs is numbered. Simple as that.
Adam Vaughan is against this development. He made that painfully clear throughout the appeals process, which was publicized in the Globe and Mail in mid February. He went as far as to say that it blew the planning framework right out of the water. And he is right. It does blow the planning framework out of the water. The man is generally in favour of development in his ward, and is entitled to his opinion. It does not make him a NIMBY. Don't confuse the two.
Adam Vaughan is against this development. He made that painfully clear throughout the appeals process, which was publicized in the Globe and Mail in mid February. He went as far as to say that it blew the planning framework right out of the water. And he is right. It does blow the planning framework out of the water. The man is generally in favour of development in his ward, and is entitled to his opinion. It does not make him a NIMBY. Don't confuse the two.
Would you happen to know if this is in response to the court proceedings against the OMB decision? In other words, is there an effort to make the building conform to the Secondary Plan?
Over the last several years, we have also seen the rise of many new clubs along and adjacent to King Street west of Spadina. The "Club District", as it existed, was a monoculture which many constituents were strongly against. That "district" may be on the decline, but there is certainly no shortage of clubs within Mr. Vaughan's ward. New restaurants, bars and clubs open every year in King-Spadina. The Thompson Hotel's Lounge is a perfect example of a brand new large multi-storey club. The school of thought is that the segregation of such land uses inevitably leads to problems - and it has on many occasions.
P.S. I am not seeing any aggressive reactions here.... but maybe that is just me. In response to the LRT hater's comment, I offer a quote from a less than popular rock song "baby cool your jets".
Would you happen to know if this is in response to the court proceedings against the OMB decision? In other words, is there an effort to make the building conform to the Secondary Plan?
