egotrippin

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
604
That forest of towers rising in the severely underpopulated Annex is such a beautiful sight. Now we just need way more of the same.
Severely underpopulated? It's one of the densest neighbourhoods in Toronto at 10,614 people per sq km (13th overall) compared to a Toronto CMA average of 866 people per sq km. This is old data from the 2006 census too, so if anything it's even denser now.
 

UtakataNoAnnex

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
3,574
Reaction score
4,689
Some colour here would have made this even better. Then again, this is my opinion on pretty much every development.
Being this project's only weakness IMO is not that bad at all in the end. Thumbs way, way up for this one so far!
 

evandyk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
1,377
Reaction score
5,044
The Annex has been getting less dense in every census since the 1970s. And it's served by two subway lines, two streetcar lines and three bus lines. Between 1971 and 2016, the Annex lost 6% of its total population. Only four neighbourhoods in the entire city shrunk more in that time frame.

 

Undead

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
2,172
Reaction score
5,171
It's dense by yellowbelt standards, but maybe not dense enough for the amount of transit in the area.
 

evandyk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
1,377
Reaction score
5,044
No part of the city should be getting less dense (and the few big buildings started/built in the Annex since 2016 will probably help) but especially not one with a bunch of subway stops.
 

egotrippin

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
604
This conversation might be quickly be flagged as off topic, but I can't find enough numbers that corroborate that data. At the very least information from the City of Toronto shows the Annex has grown over the past two census periods. Many of those big Annex houses have been turned into rooming houses or multi-unit residential as well, although some have been returned to single family housing.

I've gathered from past posts that you'd seem to be happy to see every SFH in the Toronto core replaced with condos/apartments, however I think there are much more tenable options that make use of existing buildings, while increasing density in a way that respects the existing built form.

For the record, and in an attempt to keep this vaguely on topic, I do like this development. This was definitely the type of site that justifies it and they've done a great job breaking up the different volumes as to not make it seem too monolithic.

 

evandyk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
1,377
Reaction score
5,044
I don't think that any SFH *should* be replaced. I just think it should be legal to build denser forms such as small apartment buildings anywhere, including established SFH neighbourhoods, should the property owner wish to.

Edit to add: Not quite accurate. I think SFH that are on major streets like Bathurst etc and are within a few hundred metres of subway stations should be replaced with apartments of some form.
 
  • Like
Reactions: max

JasonParis

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
6,478
Reaction score
1,617
City:
Toronto
From EllisDon: yesterday:

271986405_10158145693862167_5399626061156726201_n.jpg
It reminds me a bit of Las Vegas' New York-New York complex. Just insert rollercoaster!
 

egotrippin

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
2,329
Reaction score
604
I don't think that any SFH *should* be replaced. I just think it should be legal to build denser forms such as small apartment buildings anywhere, including established SFH neighbourhoods, should the property owner wish to.

Edit to add: Not quite accurate. I think SFH that are on major streets like Bathurst etc and are within a few hundred metres of subway stations should be replaced with apartments of some form.
I agree with both of those ideas, specifically main streets; although in my view perhaps almost anywhere, with caveats to protect/retain heritage buildings. I do apologize if I've misinterpreted your posts in the past.
 

Top