[kettal]

But according to you, high density has nothing to do with urban.

Does it make you feel like a smart boy when you take statements out of context like that and attempt to prove them wrong? Who are you trying to impress?

The fact is, you can find plenty single use land use all over downtown Toronto. Walk down any side street and you will find plenty residential-only land uses.

And if you break it down to a micro-level on a square inch by square inch basis, you will find some some land is only used for a single purpose, like a tree or a newspaper box .

In the suburbs, the first step was to define a 4-square-km block as purely residential, or purely retail, or purely an office park. That's the difference. In the pre-suburban days, it was never a problem that there would be a general store or a restaurant on your residential street.

To have lots of mixed uses everywhere would require very high density. Downtown Toronto does have more mixed land uses than the suburbs, but it is only able to support such uses because it has higher density.

High density is required for a mixed use?? Back when Toronto was a sleepy town with less than 100,000 population, almost all developed land was mixed use, and density was certainly not "ultra-high"... the tallest building was 5 storeys tall.

I hope you're embarrassed with yourself, because I'm feeling pretty embarrassed for you right now.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Might I suggest a GTAH area for those non-Toronto discussions. There are threads about areas outside of the city core (and outside the city), maybe they just need to be presented on their own.

 

[wonderboy416]

Might I suggest a GTAH area for those non-Toronto discussions. There are threads about areas outside of the city core (and outside the city), maybe they just need to be presented on their own.

I good idea but in reality I bet almost no one would stop by...

 

[doady]

Does it make you feel like a smart boy when you take statements out of context like that and attempt to prove them wrong? Who are you trying to impress?

Wow, look at the hostility. Typical of Kettal. Stop saying stupid things and you won't have get so angry at people calling you out on your BS.

And if you break it down to a micro-level on a square inch by square inch basis, you will find some some land is only used for a single purpose,

Exactly, there are varying degree of urban everywhere. So suburban and urban are not mutually exclusive concepts, which is exactly my point from the beginning.

In the suburbs, the first step was to define a 4-square-km block as purely residential, or purely retail, or purely an office park. That's the difference. In the pre-suburban days, it was never a problem that there would be a general store or a restaurant on your residential street.

Because the density was higher.

High density is required for a mixed use?? Back when Toronto was a sleepy town with less than 100,000 population, almost all developed land was mixed use, and density was certainly not "ultra-high"... the tallest building was 5 storeys tall.

Does height = density?

I hope you're embarrassed with yourself, because I'm feeling pretty embarrassed for you right now.

Unlike you, I don't hope embarrassment on anyone. Unlike you, I am not out to attack others.

 

[kettal]

Wow, look at the hostility. Typical of Kettal. Stop saying stupid things and you won't have get so angry at people calling you out on your BS.

Please, by all means, call me out on my BS.

However, putting words into my mouth is not calling me out on anything. I never said "high density has nothing to do with urban".

I'm not sure who you're arguing with, but you can stop addressing me with imaginary statements which I never said. You're not impressing anybody.

 

[Cast_Member]

Jobber

Well, eventually the person became one himself in this thread.