condovo said:
It's all about building a complete, liveable community not a Dubai-like showcase. Height for height's sake and density for density's sake is just never going to happen here. Never. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Indeed - hardly anyone is against the notion of having more density in the core, especially on this board - but it's one thing to support it an orderly, logical and beneficial manner; another to have it done as a free-for-all.

steveintoronto said:
If municipal government was held to the same strictures as provincial government is, we might all be a lot better off, but ultimately, we get the government we deserve.
Click to expand...

Would we be better off necessarily? Expediency is just as prevalent at that level.

AoD
 
Would we be better off necessarily? Expediency is just as prevalent at that level.

AoD
Click to expand...
*Accountability* is much greater at the provincial level. Don't get me wrong, it still leaves a lot wanting, we're a long way from the likes of Sweden, for instance, where "freedom of information" has existed for some 800 years, but the Elections Act and Municipal Elections Act, for instance, show vast differences in behaviour and accountability required of elected members. It's time to hold civic politics to the same level as provincial in Ontario. Not great, but a lot better. A bit off my intended focus, but Rob Ford, for instance, would not have persevered at Queen's Park. And Ford was only caught because his behaviour became so incredibly erratic. There's others below the radar...

Edit to Add: Biting my lip on this...Judson Street is still waiting for the garbage to be picked up. It's been quite a few decades since scandal of this sort was identified and dealt with in Toronto.

Late Edit: This is swerving off-topic, albeit it pertains here too, but this is fodder for the Judson Street string, just up at the CBC:
Several community groups in south Etobicoke say they're "astounded" their MP seems to be backing a local developer, instead of them, in their fight against city hall.

CBC News has learned that two weeks ago, Liberal MP James Maloney approached Metrolinx's Chief Planner Leslie Woo and encouraged the agency to drop its appeal of a controversial rezoning decision made by city council this summer.

Martin Gerwin of the Mimico Lakeshore Community Network, an umbrella group representing seven neighbourhood organizations, told CBC News "there's been no public consultation that we know of that the community is behind [Maloney]. There's a definite lack of transparency with the way he's gone about it."

Local resident Judith Rutledge echoed the comments saying the organization is "outraged" and that Maloney "doesn't reflect the viewpoint of the community."

Metrolinx warned facility might have to close if residents complained
For decades, a stretch of land on Judson Street had been used for commercial and industrial purposes. But in June, city council voted 21-15 to rezone the lands to allow for residential development. Etobicoke-based developer Dunpar Homes Limited had applied to build townhomes and a commercial building there. [...continues at length...]
Click to expand...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...-is-backing-developer-not-residents-1.3812683

Are we about to see another round of politicians of all stripes and levels (Edit to Add: *surreptitiously*) involved in land deals?
 
Last edited:
I don't think the problem is condos. I think the problem is infrastructure. Just start digging the damn relief line. We should be thankful for the development boom. We need officials who are able to get things done, not ones who are good at delaying projects and doing studies upon studies.
 
condovo said:
It's all about building a complete, liveable community not a Dubai-like showcase. Height for height's sake and density for density's sake is just never going to happen here. Never. Sorry.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware of anyone saying anything that even remotely suggests the model you are suggesting.

My point was simply that if we are perceiving there to be a problem, then it is just common sense to address the source of that problem.

Not that I perceive achieving London, England level densities is a problem in the first place. In fact, it's something some might consider a good target to shoot for.

If the current crop of bureaucrats can't handle the job, then the solution is to hire ones that can.
 
freshcutgrass said:
I'm not aware of anyone saying anything that even remotely suggests the model you are suggesting.

My point was simply that if we are perceiving there to be a problem, then it is just common sense to address the source of that problem.

Not that I perceive achieving London, England level densities is a problem in the first place. In fact, it's something some might consider a good target to shoot for.

If the current crop of bureaucrats can't handle the job, then the solution is to hire ones that can.
Click to expand...
freshcutgrass said:
If you didn't understand what I was talking about, there is no shame in saying so.
Click to expand...
I still don't understand what you are writing about, says I, shamelessly.

The problem isn't "bureaucrats" as you so crassly term them, but the elected councillors who so often over-rule them or ignore their qualified and skilled advice. Keesmaat has made a bold statement, and I've had some issues with her statements on other matters, mostly her cow-towing to Tory's heavy hand after her initially speaking out (correctly so, in my opinion), so if she runs with her latest claim, she certainly has my support, and that of a lot of others, and I'm sure Planning Staff under her. The question really is 'where does Council stand on this'?

And a bit more cynically, can we see the puppet strings moving the councillors contrary to their plebes' wishes if we look closely enough?

Waterloo_Guy said:
Does anyone here have actual insight as to what this means? Keesmaat said she would enforce the policy framework. How does the law/regulations work in this case?
Click to expand...
It's a good question, easily answered to what *policy* states, but one which rarely follows written policy. I could link all sorts of references to your question, but the real question you should be asking is "Does Council follow their own written and stated policies?".

And the answer is 'No'. It all starts with what's termed an Official Plan, then there's Secondary Plans, and things slowly fall apart right from the get-go. But rather than harp on that, I do think that a critical point is being reached where even the unmoved majority of Torontonians are wondering: "Where does this stop?"

Keesmaat could and would have been over-ruled by her political masters before. I think this time she's tapped into the emerging zeitgeist. That's a pretty safe projection to make.

But I'll take it further: She could run for Mayor after this goes critical, and have a very good chance of winning. She's going to have to be willing to stand her ground though. She might have to resign to stand her ground, Tory has been pretty slippery on a lot of what's happening.

A proviso that few understand though in dealing with Council: The Mayor has only one vote, the same as a Councillor. What a winning Mayor has to do beyond the power of one vote is being a populist, and Keesmaat could do it, and sway council like it hasn't been for decades.
 
Last edited:
steveintoronto said:
I still don't understand what you are writing about, says I, shamelessly.
Click to expand...

Put simply, halting condo projects south of Bloor as the solution to relieving the strain on the Yonge subway is actually counterproductive to that goal.

Downtown Toronto's building boom has certainly been causing a problem in terms of it being a huge construction zone, and all the annoying problems associated with that. And yes, the downtown Yonge corridor has a lot of projects proposed for that stretch. But that's the price of growth, and plenty of cities would kill for our "problem".
 
freshcutgrass said:
But that's the price of growth, and plenty of cities would kill for our "problem".
Click to expand...
It's killing us, and the Official Plan. As others have pointed out, there's far more apt places to increase density, and to do it in a way that benefits us all, not just the 'chosen'.

Let me ask you a simple question: "Whose city is this? The people's or the developers'?"

Edit to Add: It's too easy to lose track of what the present point of contention is, and 2 Carlton has become the watershed, not entire issue, so once again:
With nearly 1,600 storeys of condos proposed along the Yonge Street corridor between Dundas and Bloor, city officials say it’s time to “hit the pause button” on development.

Toronto’s chief planner, Jennifer Keesmaat, said condos are sprouting up on Yonge faster than the neighbourhood’s infrastructure can handle. As a result, she said the city is ready to talk tough with developers.

“We’ve done a great job of attracting growth, now what we need are policies to do the opposite, so that growth doesn’t override our quality of life,” she said.

Despite city policies stipulating that growth should come with amenities and infrastructure – things like parks, schools, public transit, healthcare facilities and even sewers – Keesmaat says developers are still pitching huge condo towers along stretches of Yonge where the density is already on par with London, England.

But that’s going to stop.

“When development proposals come forward that are not in keeping with our policy framework, we’re going to more quickly make it clear to the industry that it’s not acceptable,” she said.

Coun. Kristyn Wong-Tam, whose ward includes much of downtown Yonge Street, has been dealing with the impacts of intensification for years. She’s thrilled to see Keesmaat tackling the issue head-on.

Wong-Tam wants the city to make better use the tools at its disposal to slow down the condo boom on Yonge, including interim control bylaws, which can effectively freeze development in an area for up to a year.

“Every block is going to be under construction, but we don’t have expanded TTC capacity. I don’t have new affordable housing being built. We don’t have an increase in subsidized childcare spaces. I don’t even have wider sidewalks,” she said.

“We need a chance to catch up.”
Click to expand...
http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...-for-pause-button-on-yonge-street-condos.html

I initially supported Tory, he was the best of a bad bunch to choose from, but now he's really starting to disappoint. Toronto needs better...and Keesmaat just may have thrown her hat into the ring.

And btw: [Every block is going to be under construction, but we don’t have expanded TTC capacity. I don’t have new affordable housing being built. We don’t have an increase in subsidized childcare spaces. I don’t even have wider sidewalks,” she said.] is not Keesmaat being quoted, as someone recently claimed in this string , it's Cnclr Wong-Tam.
 
Last edited:
condovo said:
It's all about building a complete, liveable community not a Dubai-like showcase. Height for height's sake and density for density's sake is just never going to happen here. Never. Sorry.
Click to expand...

We have a bad habit of stopping things thinking that then we will "catch up" with other aspects, however, it doesn't happen. In 1976 we stopped the Spadina expressway and announced we are a transit city - no more expressways. The problem is they didn't build the subways and transit to compensate for the loss if the expressway. As a result we actually made the situation worse as more and more traffic was forced onto the same few arteries to get down town

The same is likely to happen here. If they stop future large developments while the "infrastructure catches up", all that will really happen is the development will continue, but in the suburbs, forcing again more pressure on our existing highways and arteries. Theses condos (homes) belong downtown. If she wants to drive the improvement of the infrastructure, she needs to take the fight to the politicians, not the developers.
 
Big Daddy said:
Theses condos (homes) belong downtown.
Click to expand...
Well, interesting that you should claim that, as even businesses on Yonge and some developers state otherwise:
[...]
The Ward 27 city councillor, along with Mark Garner, executive director of the Downtown Yonge BIA, Ryerson president Dr. Mohamed Lachemi, and Gary Switzer, CEO of MOD Developments, gathered at Yonge and Gould on Thursday to kick off Phase 1 of the Yonge Street Environmental Assessment.

“This environmental assessment study, which will be paid for by the city of Toronto, is really an accumulation and next step of work that has to be done in order for us to achieve all the great things we want to achieve on Yonge Street,” Wong-Tam explained.

The project will look at making Canada’s longest street pedestrian-friendly from Queen Street to Davenport Road through the addition of wider sidewalks, street furniture, public art and better lighting, as well as more trees and planters.

The area of study will eventually stretch as far south as Queens Quay, Wong-Tam explained.

She said the goal of the project is to make “a much more attractive street, a safe street and a street that welcomes everyone.”

And it’s a goal Wong-Tam said the people and businesses in the area have given the green light.

According to the Downtown Yonge BIA, 42 million people walk north and south on Yonge Street on an annual basis.

“Within a kilometre of where we stand right now, there’s 70,000 residents. People live in this neighbourhood and more and more are coming in the future,” Garner explained.

“That is a dramatic change from the past and one that’s transforming Yonge Street and the entire downtown.”

“We’ve been told by the business community and the residents along this street to give them something great,” she said. “We have been told to aspire to more than we could possibly imagine.”

The downtown portion of Yonge Street has remained virtually unchanged for the last 100 years and Wong-Tam said she’s inviting people from across the globe to submit their ideas for redesigning the iconic street.

“We want to send out a call to the big, creative, urban thinkers across this city, across this country, North America and abroad. We want you to come and bid on the RFP (request for proposal),” she said. “We want you to help us re-envision what Yonge Street will look like in the future.”
Click to expand...
http://www.citynews.ca/2016/07/14/toronto-studying-how-to-make-yonge-street-pedestrian-friendly/

Whose city is it again? The developers'? No-one is against intensification, is *how it's done* that's the point of contention. Growing tall weeds along a fence doesn't make for a good garden.
 
Big Daddy said:
The same is likely to happen here. If they stop future large developments while the "infrastructure catches up", all that will really happen is the development will continue, but in the suburbs, forcing again more pressure on our existing highways and arteries. Theses condos (homes) belong downtown. If she wants to drive the improvement of the infrastructure, she needs to take the fight to the politicians, not the developers.
Click to expand...

In summary, fear that if we don't concede to developers they will built in autocentric suburbs. Sorry, just comes across as to Trumpian for my tastes.

We are multi-nodal metro. I just don't think it's in the city's best interest to exclusively allow higher density apartment development only in the downtown area. There's only so much you cram down there. I don't think the intent of naming the Eglinton line "Crosstown" was to funnel people to Yonge although condo developers are sure doing their best to turn the area into a bedroom community through quick flips.
 
stjames2queenwest said:
Where would you suggest density go? Makes sense to me that it be downtown. Walkable to everything else and along transit lines.
Click to expand...


And the majority of local transit are surface routes in mixed traffic that barely moves. Bury those and than we can talk about competing with denser urban centres that have the transportation infrastructure.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top