Automation Gallery
Superstar
We don't have that luxury here hence cramping a 10' sidewalk that we share with garbage & newspaper bins, hydro/traffic light poles, TTC shelters, mail boxes, bike lockups and sandwich boards.
Lol
We don't have that luxury here hence cramping a 10' sidewalk that we share with garbage & newspaper bins, hydro/traffic light poles, TTC shelters, mail boxes, bike lockups and sandwich boards.
Yonge should definitely not remain as is. It is no different in height than Danforth. We need to have larger podiums with a nice urban presence with 2-4 storey commercial and maybe another 1-2 storey office on top. Having more than 1 storey of commercial is a necessity IMO as it leads the way to larger retailers buying up more than 1 floor and having large window displays. Aside from this argument, I think we're diluting our heritage market by including everything built X years ago. If all projects are built like five, it will look really goofy. I think we should keep the focus on the real gems that we have and instead of placing so much emphasis on preserving everything, we should instead work on adding night lighting, and improving the side walks near mentioned gems. I'll be really disappointed if the city thinks that five is a good example for every single new building on Yonge. A lot of its appeal comes from uniqueness. Why can't this city embrace change instead of hanging on to 2 storey row houses in one of our downtown's major thoroughfares?
To the vast majority of people, these look almost the same as the ones in five. That excuse is so overused, that it really has no significance. Apparently, every single building should be saved, and all development needs to be placed underground to protect vistas, heritage structures, sunlight, etc. As for "save in toto," I really have no idea what that means. Please enlighten me.
To the vast majority of people, these look almost the same as the ones in five. That excuse is so overused, that it really has no significance. Apparently, every single building should be saved, and all development needs to be placed underground to protect vistas, heritage structures, sunlight, etc.
^^While I agree that there should be professional in charge, it is also the case that the majority of people, if not the "vast" majority, in my experience, tend to be anti-development and these days especially anti-condo. You could get a random cross-section of people, across age, gender, political leanings, and find that they tend to be opposed to the average condo proposal, especially those that involve knocking old buildings down. Most people do not think of heritage as a "market" that can be "diluted" or "stimulated" by surplus or scarcity, but instead heritage buildings are worthy of protection to preserve both our history and the desirable neighbourhoods these heritage buildings create.
Plus a few "this is old crap, get rid of it" McMansion-mentality mouthbreathers....
In Paris much of their main shopping and cultural corridors have wide avenues and boulevards with much wider sidewalk space making their taller buildings that line the street feel more to scale. We don't have that luxury here hence cramping a 10' sidewalk that we share with garbage & newspaper bins, hydro/traffic light poles, TTC shelters, mail boxes, bike lockups and sandwich boards.