Too tall buildings on the Waterfront

The height issue from my standpoint is not a warm and
squishy view argument which has no legal standing in
this community; rather, there exists a document
bonding one property owner to a certain outcome and it
must be honored.

Allowing development to wiggle out of contracts and
agreements signed as a covenant to a property negates
the entire purpose for such covenant. The precedent,
once laid, essentially nullifies all similar
agreements if a proponent can convince our unelected
City staff to ignore the covenant and promote a
different outcome.

Alternatively, this is a have/have not issue. The
properties lining the natural waterfront have
benefited from being at the edge, whereas the filling
of the bay and abandonment of industrial properties
allows for a new edge. The new edge has the advantage
of maximizing income from selling/leasing view
properties at the expense of those further inland.
Simply arguing, "That's not fair", is not
substantially significant.

My opinion on this is that regardless of the right of
the property owner or proponent to build on land to
certain standard enjoyed by neighboring properties,
there is in place a covenant on the proposed property
and it must hold sway. To do otherwise puts in
jeopardy all other current or future covenants,
planned development contracts and various other land
use bonds across the entire community.

Michael McAuley
201-7199