News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.9K     0 

"There was some guy hoping to buy a house for $275K. Good luck buddy. You can't even buy a 2 bedroom condo in North York for that amount."

Right now on MLS there's 30 houses in central Toronto listed for under $275,000, and another 455 in the rest of Toronto. Markham, Vaughan, and Richmond Hill have 3 listed combined. Your condo remark is just plain wrong.

"A backyard is a great way to let the kids out while you wash dishes."

But Toronto houses also have backyards...if anything, they might have a larger backyard and if they don't, they'll probably be closer to more parkland than anything in the 905.

"Right now I still feel that I want to be somewhere in the city, say Scarborough, but when the time comes and I look at prices, I might decide that proximity to the places I never use anyways is overrated."

Scarborough is cheaper than Markham and it will stay that way for a while. A lot also depends on where you work.

"Huh? I live out in the burbs and the I have to cross an arterial road to get to the closest convenience store, and it isn't an isolated circumstance anywhere."

For everyone on your side of the arterial, there's someone on the other side that doesn't need to cross the street. Honestly, how often do people actually need to run to the convenience store anyway when they're at home...it happens about as often as people suddenly needing to dash out and buy milk. It happens only in hypothetical arguments like these. None of this would be an issue if stuff like the stupid neighbourhood unit principle hadn't have been adopted everywhere.

"As to the no dodging comment - try going across within 40 seconds with cars doing right turns same time."

40 seconds? And do you have to cross an on-ramp to the 403 or something? The intersection of Woodbine & Steeles is one of the most pedestrian-hostile in the GTA (~9 lanes across and a zillion turning cars getting off the highway) but I've never had a problem crossing it...all of my bad pedestrian experiences have been downtown.
 
scarberian:

For everyone on your side of the arterial, there's someone on the other side that doesn't need to cross the street. Honestly, how often do people actually need to run to the convenience store anyway when they're at home...it happens about as often as people suddenly needing to dash out and buy milk. It happens only in hypothetical arguments like these. None of this would be an issue if stuff like the stupid neighbourhood unit principle hadn't have been adopted everywhere.
Click to expand...

It's rather comforting to know that half of the people won't have to cross an arterial road, tough luck for the other half, however. Besides, regarding comment on whether people need to run to the convenience store - isn't that the whole argument anyways - that spontaneity of living is diminished for those who doesn't drive or are otherwise restricted to other modes of transporation in the suburbs?

40 seconds? And do you have to cross an on-ramp to the 403 or something? The intersection of Woodbine & Steeles is one of the most pedestrian-hostile in the GTA (~9 lanes across and a zillion turning cars getting off the highway) but I've never had a problem crossing it...all of my bad pedestrian experiences have been downtown.
Click to expand...

It's a ballpark figure (i.e. short) - I am a fast walker and I can barely across it within the allocated time. Imagine someone who a slower walker (say, an adult with a child or two, pulling along a stroller, or the elderly) doing the same? And what happens during winter, if there is accumulation? You might argue one can do a 2-staged crossing, but there were no accomodation for that at the median. The point is - you can't take the healthiest segment of the population and assume everyone in society will have an equally easy time at it.

AoD
 
I have to disagree with you on that one,Toronto does not have well planned communities. Just look at certain neighbourhoods that have pockets have new developments. The concept here is called "available land." And you've seen this everywhere in Toronto, small pockets of land in prime areas being used to build townhomes, sometimes detached homes and of course condos. You call this well planned communities?? There is no community planning here. As we know it is using what land we have in Toronto to make the fast buck.

"Right now on MLS there's 30 houses in central Toronto listed for under $275,000, and another 455 in the rest of Toronto. Markham, Vaughan, and Richmond Hill have 3 listed combined. Your condo remark is just plain wrong"

That's why Markham and Richmond Hill are upscale neighbourhoods. I did my own search on MLS and you are correct there are 30 houses for under $275,000 in central Toronto. But read some of the descrption of these houses "Handy man special" "Yours to renovate" "Condo alternative". You pay low at first but then factor in the renovation and repair costs...do the math! And these houses aren't even in ideal locations. Lower end East York, Weston-Jane and Lawrence area. I perfect place to raise your kids? You get what you pay for my friend.

And as for the argument about convenience. New suburban areas like Legacy in Markham is growing. Toronto has time on thier side. It takes time to build the proper infracstructure. Its impossible to compare a new neighbourhood to an area in Toronto that already has systems in place. You have to look at the stage of developments of a community. A good example is the Viva system, although its not going to be a perfect solution, its baby steps in the right direction. When community planning is done right from the start, it easier to build the infrastructure to support it. And thats how a good community grows.
 
Baghai:

I have to disagree with you on that one,Toronto does not have well planned communities. Just look at certain neighbourhoods that have pockets have new developments. The concept here is called "available land." And you've seen this everywhere in Toronto, small pockets of land in prime areas being used to build townhomes, sometimes detached homes and of course condos. You call this well planned communities?? There is no community planning here. As we know it is using what land we have in Toronto to make the fast buck.
Click to expand...

Here is a representation of the "pretty picture" argument of planning (aka "planning as a diagram" school of thought). The important thing is not that these areas have lots of new, seemingly random developments - but the fact that they can accomodate new developments as a part of an evolving urban complex. You rarely see that in "master planned" community out in the suburbs, and that is telling as to how flexible those community plans are.

And as for the argument about convenience. New suburban areas like Legacy in Markham is growing. Toronto has time on thier side. It takes time to build the proper infracstructure. Its impossible to compare a new neighbourhood to an area in Toronto that already has systems in place. You have to look at the stage of developments of a community. A good example is the Viva system, although its not going to be a perfect solution, its baby steps in the right direction. When community planning is done right from the start, it easier to build the infrastructure to support it. And thats how a good community grows.
Click to expand...

Convenience has nothing to do with infrastructure per se - it has all to do with the spatial organization of the necessities of life, and how well it accomodate for access by a wide variety of individuals. And for the record, suburban communities are remarkably stable - on a whole, they don't evolve that much (given the high level of land use segregation and organization, as well as community resistance). In addition, VIVA has nothing to do with access of the daily necessities of life - it's a transit trunk line, not a neigbhourhood service.

What does doing community planning "right" from the start means, exactly (other than the usual talk about x number of bikepaths separate from roadways, or x hectares of parkland the development)? I don't see how planning a pretty low density community makes it "easier" to build sustainable infrastructure to support it. In fact, I'd argue these communities are over planned and cannot respond to changing urban conditions.

AoD
 
"perfect place to raise your kids? You get what you pay for my friend."

Once again, you're ignoring the fact that the east and west ends of Toronto are perhaps the most affordable places to live in the entire GTA. I know that the area between Bathurst and the DVP/404 is really expensive, but it's not the only place worth living in. But if you have the money to live in Markham, go for it.

"It's rather comforting to know that half of the people won't have to cross an arterial road, tough luck for the other half, however."

I'm sorry, but crossing arterials is not tough. Crossing at Bay & Bloor at 5pm...now that can be a bit more risky.

Besides, regarding comment on whether people need to run to the convenience store - isn't that the whole argument anyways - that spontaneity of living is diminished for those who doesn't drive or are otherwise restricted to other modes of transporation in the suburbs?"

I don't really disagree with you, but the spontaneity issue has more to do with the character of land use in the suburbs, not the mode of transportation - you can walk or cycle or take a bus or even drive for 10 minutes in any direction and not come across anything except houses and occasional, identical strip malls.

"It's a ballpark figure (i.e. short) - I am a fast walker and I can barely across it within the allocated time. Imagine someone who a slower walker (say, an adult with a child or two, pulling along a stroller, or the elderly) doing the same? And what happens during winter, if there is accumulation? You might argue one can do a 2-staged crossing, but there were no accomodation for that at the median. The point is - you can't take the healthiest segment of the population and assume everyone in society will have an equally easy time at it."

I'd really like to see this road that seems to be wider than the 401.
 
There is no community planning here. As we know it is using what land we have in Toronto to make the fast buck.
Click to expand...
But how's that any different from what fringe municipalities are doing? All fringe cities, including the outer boroughs of Toronto when they were fringe cities 40 years ago, zone new farmland such that it generates as much income as fast as possible, and requries the least amount of municipal servicing.

Why do you think low density housing prevails on the edge of the city? Because by zoning it that way, the appeal to developers is maximized, and the least amount of new infrastructure has to be provided by the actual municipality or region. Sprawl requires the fewest new schools, fire stations, roads (the developer builds those), and avoids costly infrastructure upgrades within the existing urbanized area. Far reaching developments allow most new traffic to be carried on highways - wholly funded by the province - rather than local roads which are wholly funded by the municipality.

You can't blame Toronto for maximizing land development profit when all municipalities in all growth stages are doing the exact same thing. And realize that the planning component of infill developments occurs when the Official Plan is drafted. Baghai, do you really think that a 5 unit infill project requires the same input as a master planned community?
 
Baghai, I think you're missing the point of what a "well-planned community" actually is. Good planning is the act of making the built form of a neighbourhood one that allows the residents to lead enjoyable lives. It's not about ensuring that all of the housing looks the same!
 
A well-maintained home, in a slightly-below-average Toronto neighbourhood (not talking Jane-finch here), with a backyard, can't be had for $275,000. If those are the priorities then Toronto is not an option.

Totally agree about commuting times -- for me that ranks equally with the above factors. But you know the saying: neighbourhood, house quality, affordability -- pick any two.

In that light, I think Markham isn't doing all that bad with some of the new subdivisions. However they have made a few critical mistakes, such as not having a main street, and perhaps these mistakes are fatal with respect to ever building a "vibrant" neighbourhood. Toronto does have time on its side but some ills actually get worse with time. In Markham's case I don't think the land will ever descend into semi-slums like some of Toronto's inner suburbs, nor will they ever produce an urban success. They'll just remain pleasant suburbs.
 
"A well-maintained home, in a slightly-below-average Toronto neighbourhood (not talking Jane-finch here), with a backyard, can't be had for $275,000. If those are the priorities then Toronto is not an option."

Well, on MLS, Toronto East has 288 listings for single family houses under $275,000. Prices are still climbing, though, so this number will drop with time. What's slightly-below-average for you? Yonge & Lawrence? Why does it seem every housing argument must descend into an Annex, Jane & Finch, or nothing type of scenario?

"In Markham's case I don't think the land will ever descend into semi-slums like some of Toronto's inner suburbs"

Ever is a long time. If neighbourhoods without clusters of sketchy towers can be deemed so, the Denison area may already qualify as a semi-slum.
 
How do you explain the clusters of condos and townhomes that are quickly going up in the downtown core and north york area? You can't argue that the current infrastracture can support new development in the city. How do existing schools support the increase of population in an established community? Can the exiting roads handle the increase of traffic? I don't see how new development in established areas in Toronto can handle the current infracstructure.

In suburbia, like the Legacy Community in Markham is a good model of community planning. At first it was promoted as an area that only built detached-only homes. Recently, the town zoned vacant lands along the 407 as high density. The community as a whole voiced their opinion and were able to convince the town to amend the existing new land in Legacy as low density, single detached home development only.

Just a reminder, I dont live in Markham, I have just heard and read alot of what these communities are doing. Its a good direction and model of good community planning.
 
"How do existing schools support the increase of population in an established community?"

North York's condos are doing very little to fill schools with kids - who squeezes 3 kids into a 600 sq. ft suite? - the bigger problem is that all the houses in the area have been inhabited by widows and elderly couples for decades and now families are moving in.

"In suburbia, like the Legacy Community in Markham is a good model of community planning."

There are no jobs and no stores within walking distance...good job Legacy! All the golf courses and parkland is nice to raise kids around, but it may doom local bus routes. It really depends on what you're looking for...lots of people will be happy there.
 
It's interesting that I know a number of Chinese parents who moved their whole family from Scarborough to North York Centre just so their kids can get into Earl Haig for high school, instead of going to "ghetto" Scarborough high schools. I'm assuming that a lot of them probably bought condos in North York Centre.
 
Obviously there's some kids in the condos - there's bound to be when there's like 10,000 condo units going up - but I'm willing to bet the bulk of the new kids so far have come from the houses.
 
Doesn't matter where they come from. It's the fact that the schools in the area cannot support the increase of population.
It's probably at its peak right now, and we'll see the ripple effects of this in the near future.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top