Mayor Steinberg, you defend yourself with semantics when you say that a high rise is defined as 13 storeys or more when these buildings are "only" 10. Given the existing structures on CSL Road right now, the proposed building IS in effect and in impact, if not in number of stories, a "high rise".
You claim they don't qualify as "luxury", yet you yourself described them as options for the wealthier residents of Hampstead who wished to downsize.
You claim there is no affordable housing crisis in Hampstead, yet your constituents who are being displaced are not able to find comparable places to live at comparable costs within the area. You need only ask them directly to see the truth. While you may not see a crisis M. le Maire, I'm sure these constituents of yours would tell a different story.
Legality and truth are often lines that can be negotiated if the skill is there. We've been exposed many times, of late, to how well politicians of all stripes can walk those fine lines.
But tell the readers this, M le Maire.
In comparison to what these constituents are currently paying for their homes, will the miserly - and apparently time sensitive - 15% discount offered to any who wish to move in to the new building - on only FIVE units - allow them to easily afford it? As easily as they keep a roof over their heads now? Even if it were, what do you propose they do in the interim?
And when, by your own admission, there are "boarded up buildings, an empty lot and other empty buildings" on CSL Road, can you explain in a cogent and convincing manner the reason why it makes more sense to toss your constituents out of the only homes some of them have ever known? Instead of using this development to put to use what already stands unused? What is it exactly that motivated you to use an illegal veto to countermand something that was voted on and rejected?
M le Maire, you don't ever seem to answer direct questions, "defending" your actions by piling ridicule on those who question you instead. Are the families in these two buildings not as worthy of your concern as your more well-heeled constituents?
Rossana S. Tarantini