Search results

Glad you agree. :-) More to your point, don't see that to be an issue in Parkdale. Lots of towers, multi-storey buildings, institutions, etc. etc. I would say your point applies more, much more, elsewhere in the city.

Development proposals get scrutinized. This is good.

There was a meeting: http://www.insidetoronto.com/news-story/6228880-residents-call-redevelopment-of-funeral-home-on-roncesvalles-over-ambitious-/ I haven't heard anything since.

Try reading the whole thread. The proposal is the size the architect wants. He is complaining that the plan protects neighbourhoods so he won't get the full-size he wants. So the plan is broken, or the city is broken, etc. etc. And I am saying that arguing that we need density in the city as a...

So what if you can find a plot or two that is not developed to your liking. That by itself is no justification to increase the above-average density in Parkdale. Densification is not an argument for development for its own sake.

Might be worth a try.

It will be interesting to see if there are shared facilities for the whole development, or individual facilities in each building. One would build community, the other not.

Well, even if the buildings aren't yet designed, we certainly do know who the telecom provider will be...

I agree, to some developers, it is a game. How to jimmy the system. But it doesn't always work, like I mentioned with Giraffe and T&P. If projects went through without having to go to the OMB, then other developers could learn from that. Most of the time they get their way at the OMB. But, by...

See the original post. The architect was complaining (whining imo) about the official plan making neighbourhoods sacrosanct. I'm not against redevelopment of the site. In my area north-west of the area, we've had several redevelopments where the developer wanted their proposal to go through...

There is also the myth that new redevelopment always improves a neighbourhood. :-)

Parkdale has the 8th highest density of a neighbourhood according to the 2006 census. So, if an architect is whining that the area should/must take more density (and must take his building as-is) and won't because the official plan is broken, well, there is no credibility to his argument. I...

Architects whining about sacrosanct neighbourhoods would have more cred if they were talking about building to increase density where it is needed. That's my main feeling about the Globe article. I live near Sorauren but I work in Scarborough and occasionally walk through neighbourhoods at...

Parkdale's density was increased decades ago. It's not low density. Parkdale already has enough density to support high-order transit. Other neighbourhoods do not.

a) Parkdale was re-developed decades ago. Lots of towers. It has one of the highest densities in the city and doesn't 'need' more. c) Stable is good. Parkdale has its share of everything. It does not need to be crammed further. d) It's still within a mile. Again, we don't need to push up the...

The neighbourhood already has -lots- of rental. The neighbourhood -Parkdale- already has lots of towers. The Globe article is the usual whininess from a developer when the city wants the proposal changed. There is no way the official plan makes existing neighbourhoods 'sacrosanct'. What a load...