The initial building is an eight-storey block, of pure Stalinist design, covering every square inch of site with no green space and less than two metres’ setback from two of the busiest streets in the Capital Regional District.
The content of this letter is pretty funny, especially considering their later comments regarding what makes our city's streets so pleasant:
"We need to rethink the rules about building heights and architectural design, also impose a minimum of 10 metres’ green setback from road easements on all large buildings — which is why many of our older streets are so pleasant."
The older streets in the downtown core which the writer references have basically no set-backs or easements whatsoever; it's not tons of open spaces that makes these areas vibrant, rather it's the density of buildings and variety and interest in the architecture itself that makes these streets enjoyable. If the reader wants that in newly emerging urban spaces like the McKenzie-Shelbourne area, then a blanket upzoning should be given in the main core to ensure developers can build wall-to-wall buildings with 1-plus-5 density. And 10 metres' setbacks? That would literally be 2/3 of the lot. I agree with wider pedestrian sidewalks, boulevards, and protected bike lanes, but you do need space for the actual building itself.