balenciaga
Banned
are you saying if these people don't live downtown, they won't take the YUS line? Where do these 800K people come from? or you assume they all drive?
- Thread starter androiduk
- Start date
are you saying if these people don't live downtown, they won't take the YUS line? Where do these 800K people come from? or you assume they all drive?
johnwood
Active Member
The infrastructure will be needed sooner or later due to the increasing population, you can't stop the increasing population, and its only a like 5 thousand people. So don't stop the building process, it makes the city a lot of money.
Hanlansboy
Active Member
And not one mention of Jesus, Locusts and plagues? Lol! Who are these people? A tad out of touch with reality, they live in a downtown condo yet expect the sun, rising over the lake, watching the morning dew on a lillypad, as the wind whistles through the trees and the birds chirp.......I think they are confusing condo for cottage! Probably old, miserable people with money, and nothing else to do but be a royal pain in the ass just because they can, do we really have to consider their completely ignorant and pointless opinions?
SP!RE
°°°°°°
It's one thing to critique the waterfront residents' (hypocritical) NIMBYism and the more unreasonable among the demands they put forth. That's productive and creates useful discussion.
It's another to make fun of them and mock them. That is not productive and only alienates them from the discussion.
It's another to make fun of them and mock them. That is not productive and only alienates them from the discussion.
brockm
Active Member
It's too tiring to debate point-by-point with the YQRA. I've tried. Part of my mockery was to point out the grasping--at-straws and incongruence of their position.
But it turns out that I've figured out their real concerns after berating them: they just like things the way they are. And they don't want change.
The nonsense debating positions they throw out, in particular the ones that don't even concern them directly (like CN Tower sightlines for tourists) are just endemic of the fact they're dishonest about their real motives. Thus, any attempt at reasonable debate is a fool's errand.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
The key of that is to expose that fact to the people who enforce height cuts, not to convince the YQRA that it is a good development. You have to show that their concerns are just a front because they don't want the development at all, and that will show the people in power that they will be unhappy no matter the situation.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
If you can no longer reasonably debate, then excuse yourself from the debate.
In my opinion, there are as many insufferable skyscraper-fanboys on UrbanToronto are there are insufferable Harbourfront NIMBY's attending meetings.
We should be as self-critical as we are of the Harbourfront NIMBYs. A height-fanboy who doesn't consider questions of density and sustainability is as insufferable as a NIMBY who does nothing but spew hatred for development.
Last edited:
brockm
Active Member
You can combine mockery with a thorough dismantling of their positions. Don't worry. I fully attend to show up at any public consultation to counter these fools.
brockm
Active Member
What makes you think I'm a skyscraper fanboy?
adma
Superstar
Uh...really?!? You'd advocate redeveloping streets like Huron?
Here's what the vast bulk of Toronto-minded urbanists would think of that idea
SP!RE
°°°°°°
Huh? I never even directed a post towards you, and I wasn't calling anyone in particular a fanboy. I was simply saying that I think a lot of people here like to mock NIMBYs, all the while being just as intolerable themselves (buy YIMBY instead). I was trying to explain that I don't see how being inherently pro-development (as in the fanboys who never question development and are ALWAYS pro-developer) is any better than anti-development. Shouldn't each individual case be questioned and judged on its individual merits?
SP!RE
°°°°°°
@ balenciaga...
What's wrong with storied streets that make you feel "like you're in the US midwest"?
And especially, what's wrong with residential streets like that when they form part of very dynamic neighbourhoods like Queen West or The Annex?
What's wrong with storied streets that make you feel "like you're in the US midwest"?
And especially, what's wrong with residential streets like that when they form part of very dynamic neighbourhoods like Queen West or The Annex?
egotrippin
Senior Member
You're seriously proposing that we raze blocks and blocks of Victorian rowhouses all in the name of density? The very buildings and mature tree-lined streets that give downtown Toronto its charm and character? There's room for smart infill, but what you're proposing is appalling; Toronto houses North America's largest collection of intact Victorian houses, and with the rapid loss of our older commercial buildings, it's the one bit of history of which we still have a decent collection.
Along with your comments about razing the old commercial buildings along Queen West and Dundas West, I can't help but believe that you'd rather Toronto in its entirety become a sterile and bland vertical suburb along the lines of Cityplace. Streets such as the ones you've posted, and the commercial thoroughfares surrounding the core are more urban than a vast majority of anything built here in the past half century.
diminutive
Active Member
I don't see anything wrong with those areas (which are also much denser than they look), but the widespread desire to maintain those areas more or less as is forever and always does impact how the City is densified.
In the context of the debate around Toronto's 1 Yonges being "too asian" and "not European enough," the wide swathes of Toronto we opt to keep low-ish (or moderate) density to some extent requires that developable sites be used to the maximum extent.
As I understand the official plan, one of the goals of downtown's condofication is specifically to head off any need to redevelop low rise downtown. So, the maybe excessive densities we see in some areas shouldn't just be seen in abstraction from low-rise downtown.
balenciaga
Banned
These house don't give Toronto charm and character. They make downtown look like a suburb and prevent it from achieving higher density and vibrancy. These are nothing but sleepy streets occupied by households of 3-4. More importantly, it is not like Toronto has a shortage of houses or streets like them. In fact, the entire city is full of them, isn't it? To me, unless with exceptional value such as the Osgood Hall, 2 storey buildings belong to the suburbs, not downtown. They are a waste of space. Yes, history and blah blah but as I mentioned, we have this kind of houses everywhere outside downtown, don't we?
I don't like sterile and bland vertical communities like CityPlace. Not liking 2 story old houses doesn't mean I am a fan of green glass towers. I think replace them 4-12 storey apartment and other commercial buildings make more sense. I don't particularly dislike Victorian houses. I just don't like the fact they are 2 storeys and therefore waste too much land which should be occupied by more residents/businesses. King street East type of character is what is ideal. No crazy high rises glass boxed but no two storey houses wasting precious downtown land as well.