Admiral Beez
Superstar
Why is their ethnicity or race relevant?
As for the OMB or it's replacement, why can't we just stick to our official city plans without interference from the province?
|
|
|
- Thread starter AlvinofDiaspar
- Start date
As for the OMB or it's replacement, why can't we just stick to our official city plans without interference from the province?
Palma
Senior Member
when was the last time you went to barcelonia? A friend of my son at school came here with his family for 2 years. Before the family went back, the mon said she wanted to live in the city and so would need to live in an apartment which she says are 4-6 storey. i asked are there not higher apts and she said no cause people do not like them high. I was in london, travelled to Bath, cantebury, and Windosr, and while travelling by train, never saw tall apts - nothing above 4-6 and mainly just townhouses and houses. I think they exist in the new financial area in London - the doclands or wherever they have new developement. So when people compare here to Europe, Europe does not have these tall, tall buildings. I have not been all over Europe but just by the fact how old it is, it is not littered with tall buildings
jje1000
Senior Member
Race is relevant because the largest cohort of NIMBYs are often those who have the time and money (usually retired or middle-upper class upwards) to organize- these people often skew towards the white, landed boomers & gen x-ers who have had the privilege to acquire their properties for a relative bargain. The largest irony is when you see generally wealthy Liberal-voting areas like Eglinton & High Park end up being vehemently anti-shelter, anti-density, anti-whatever.
Now, whether this opposition might fade away as our city changes in its basal character remains to be seen. Are other cultures and generations more permissive of density and YIMBY-ism? Or do those cultures change in contact with the majority culture?
Again, I can't believe I have to explain it to you- these people do not even want 2-4 story townhouses or 4-6 story apartment blocks like in Eixample or in other European cities. They want North American suburban-levels of density.
narduch
Senior Member
Hell, they probably don't even want that.
They'd probably prefer an empty undeveloped field. As long as its not ugly.
They don't want anything that will make their quiet neighbourhood any busier.
jje1000
Senior Member
Applicable in Toronto as in everywhere- though you see the 'Property Valueist', the 'Auntie Anti' and the 'One Nation Under Car' more often here than not.
https://thebolditalic.com/know-your-nimbys-the-bold-italic-san-francisco-25f1125d6fee
https://thebolditalic.com/know-your-nimbys-the-bold-italic-san-francisco-25f1125d6fee
Palma
Senior Member
I have said that is crazy to be against 4-6 storey on major streets or Avenues. I don't think that people that bought before the crash of 1989 bought at basement bargain prices for you to suggest they were privilege to buy at low prices. Guess what? In 30 years, prices today will look like bargain. All cultures, as they become more prosperous will not become more permissive of density. In addition, politically I was always Liberal or more left than that and NDP. Over the years as I have gotton older and I have seen the waste of money by the left which I never would have believed and how things has ventured so far to the left, I have become more conservative. For the first time in my life, provincially I will be voting Liberal
Admiral Beez
Superstar
If there was ever a money wasting leftist government it's Wynn's. I've voted for all parties provincially - I'm going conservative this time.
Palma
Senior Member
Again, people can mention"white to describe certain people yet no other race can be mentioned or one is deemed a racist. Unreal. Nothing wrong with people wanting to protect their land values. the only people against that are those that do not own property
doug
Active Member
LOL, you don't understand inflation.
There is a strange mindset amongst today's young, they feel they have a right to own property where they want and it's someone else's fault that they can't afford it.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
I think today's news article exemplifies what is wrong with the idea of removing the OMB.
Hot-Button Midtown Proposal Scaled Back with Resubmission
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/09/hot-button-midtown-proposal-scaled-back-resubmission
What was 2 apartment rental towers totalling 369 rental units adjacent to major rapid transit, has been scaled down to a single tower with just 176 'rental and freehold condominium' units.
The NIMBYs got their way, although I am sure we will immediately hear about how it was not enough in the coming days.
Meanwhile, 193 would-be rental units that could have housed lower-income renter families have been erased from existence in an area with great schools, transit and employment access and services.
Hot-Button Midtown Proposal Scaled Back with Resubmission
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2017/09/hot-button-midtown-proposal-scaled-back-resubmission
What was 2 apartment rental towers totalling 369 rental units adjacent to major rapid transit, has been scaled down to a single tower with just 176 'rental and freehold condominium' units.
The NIMBYs got their way, although I am sure we will immediately hear about how it was not enough in the coming days.
Meanwhile, 193 would-be rental units that could have housed lower-income renter families have been erased from existence in an area with great schools, transit and employment access and services.
blixtex
Active Member
I don't live in the area (in Scarborough) but also don't agree with many of the developer stamped approval that often overrides the local by-laws/zoning occurring all throughout the city. Does that count as NIMBYs? Or is that just the term for anybody that's against dense, don't consider local resources tower condo/stacked townhouse development?
IMO, the profit motive absolutely overrides general common sense and the enhancement of total utility (it's always on the focus for newcomers/new renters.. ohh won't someone think of the childre.. I mean renters/newcomers/urban loving dwellers!) So what if the consideration for hospitals, schools, infrastructure is not considered. I'm an immigrant, my parents are as well. Did all the stuff, small business owner, OSAP, universisty, living and commute from Scarborough, blah blah. And people today just want immediate gratification of living in the 'core' instead of having to commute and develop the city more evenly. And because of that, aesthetically pleasing, more historical neighbourhoods are utterly discarded to make way and make the exception for the 'stick out like a sore' thumb, money money money building approach.
The irony is, the very thing that people today moving in today for the reason of "I love this city and all it's convenience" are actually undermining themselves as this movement will only result in those very unique shops being torn down, priced out, etc..
W. K. Lis
Superstar
kicked it in the sun
New Member
just so crazy for me to imagine that while everyone else is moving toward OMB-style controls to prevent wealthy incumbents from preventing housing in their areas, toronto/ontario is going the other way. just yesterday, california's governor signed 15 bills that make it more difficult for cities/neighbors to block housing, and here ontario is not only making it easier for the anti-growth gang, they're actually setting up a slush fund so that to pay for it!
the government has lost its mind. the OMB has played a huge part in keeping toronto relatively affordable. what happens when the number of units coming online each year is cut in half? and the units there are 15% more expensive because of costs associated with battling it out with neighbors (delays, payoffs, unit reductions). it's like the public has been hypnotized into thinking detaching home prices from home supply.
the government has lost its mind. the OMB has played a huge part in keeping toronto relatively affordable. what happens when the number of units coming online each year is cut in half? and the units there are 15% more expensive because of costs associated with battling it out with neighbors (delays, payoffs, unit reductions). it's like the public has been hypnotized into thinking detaching home prices from home supply.
DSC
Superstar
The proposed OMB reforms do NOT abolish the Board - they are designed to ensure that the Board 'only' ensures that existing and approved municipal and provincial land us plans are followed. It is quite wrong for an unelected Board to have the power, as they do now, to be able to overrule municipal decisions which have been made after public consultations and Council decisions and which follow the wider Planning documents.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
The OMB looks at cases de novo, while using the evidence that Council had access too.
So basically, if a staff report comes in saying "yah this application is acceptable and complies to provincial and municipal plans", and then Council decides "hell to the no" (after maybe reading public perception to the application?) then the applicant can appeal to the OMB who will then look at the evidence Council had access to, including those staff reports saying "yah this application is acceptable and complies to provincial and municipal plans" and then make a decision.
It is not wrong at all for the present Board to have power to hold municipal politicians to account for politicized decisions that run contrary to staff reports and municipal&provincial OPs.