AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
So, why did they ask for the area to be rezoned to allow for senior residences and megachurches in the first place?
AoD
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
So, why did they ask for the area to be rezoned to allow for senior residences and megachurches in the first place?
AoD
MrsNesbitt
Active Member
Really this is all overreaction after the fact. I doubt that any of these people complaining had a clue of what the zoning was for the area when they moved in or before the bus garage was announced.
When you move into an area near industrial zones you're accepting that you may be putting yourselves at higher risk of health problems owing to that proximity. The garage is not the only industrial use nearby, and it certainly wouldn't be right to re-zone some of the dwindling employment lands in the city for yet more residential.
Some NIMBY causes I'm sympathetic to, when the developer really is putting their foot in their mouth with a dumb, unnecessary, or detrimental development. Not this one though - the garage will do wonders for bus service in a region of the city where ridership is high anyways.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Indeed, the rationale and benefits for this project is pretty obvious. Not so sure about the wisdom of said organizations choosing to locate in industrial area (and one that is not undergoing land use transitions at large).
AoD
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Let me get this straight... They knew that the bus garage was coming and requested that Council rezone the lands near the lands for mega churches and senior homes? Screw 'em, they can move somewhere else if the busses bother them.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I think the senior home and mega church predate the bus garage plans - but anyways, that's not the point, given they're both located in an area zoned industrial.
AoD
Last edited:
salsa
Senior Member
If I were them, I'd move in a heartbeat. This area is ugly as hell.
Last edited by a moderator:
W. K. Lis
Superstar
The TTC and the CUTA (Canadian Urban Transit Association) should look into the possibility of "approving" baby strollers for use on public transit vehicles. It frustrates most passengers when parents bring in their SUV strollers that block everyone.
Especially when there are "umbrella" strollers that use much less space.
Attachments
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I don't think they need to approve any models - all they need to do is take a serious effort to enforce the bylaws and bar any that obstructs passenger movement on a vehicle. Of course, they aren't doing it - likely on the grounds of optics and accessibility. That said, the situation didn't seem to be nearly as bad as a few years ago, when the Battlestar Galactica sized, SUV tri-trolleys one slight step above a wheelbarrow seemed to be all the rage.
AoD
Last edited:
Wrenkin
Active Member
You realize that the first stroller you show holds two children, while the second holds only one? It's a pretty poor comparison.
salsa
Senior Member
I once read a Star article about this issue, and someone proposed this brilliant solution in the comments:
Maybe it's time to install a rack at the back of the bus for the strollers. Why should they be allowed on the bus, but not bikes. Why are cyclists always treated like second class citizens? At least make the babies pay the fare for the privilege. Bunch of freeloaders.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
I've seen parents of kids two years or older still using the strollers. If the kids can walk, have them walk. Of course the reason for them to use the strollers is to disguise the fact that those kids no longer are eligible to ride free because they are over 2 years. 75¢ is too much for them?
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Sometimes you need strollers, even with older children. When my twin daughters were two years old they could walk just fine, but we took them to England that year, and strollers are very helpful when getting around airports and transit while pulling luggage, etc. What my wife and I did though was to have two umbrella strollers than temporarily locked together. This way we could take them as carry-on instead of checking them either at the door or back at check-in, meaning the exit in Heathrow was much easier with the long walk from aircraft to luggage bay. I remember congratulating my wife and I when we saw the other parents struggling with their mega strollers.
Of course these are sidewalk hogs, so as soon as we could we would de-couple and each take a kid.
Of course these are sidewalk hogs, so as soon as we could we would de-couple and each take a kid.
Attachments
nfitz
Superstar
Strollers indeed have their place occasionally with children older than 2. A more likely occurrence on the TTCis a trip to the zoo, or some similar outing. However, there are times I see children much older than 2, who appear like they are doing this every day.
Personally, I can't stand the things. It's far easier and more convenient, to simply put the child in a carrier on your front. I'm still doing this with my 2-year old (not so much because he needs to be carried, but because it's just simpler, constrains him, and I have much less to worry about boarding and unboarding.
Personally, I can't stand the things. It's far easier and more convenient, to simply put the child in a carrier on your front. I'm still doing this with my 2-year old (not so much because he needs to be carried, but because it's just simpler, constrains him, and I have much less to worry about boarding and unboarding.
salsa
Senior Member
Respect.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Nfitz: UT parent of the year!