junctionist
Senior Member
The only question here is whether this badinage is worse than the most ignorant sentiment in the Toronto Star comments section.
|
|
|
An end to high rises in Toronto?
- Thread starter GoldenBoy_aka_money
- Start date
jks
Continuous Lurker
^^Nothing is worse than the most ignorant sentiment in the Toronto Star comments section.
doady
Senior Member
I would support a ban on high-rises because they block sunlight and create wind tunnels. But banning them for aesthetic reasons is just dumb. There are plenty of ugly low-rise buildings out there.
Whoaccio
Senior Member
What the hell? This has got to be the dumbest idea. Why don't we just ban people from living in Toronto?
In another post in the "I HATE Toronto" thread, it was pointed out by myself and others that a good chunk of Torontonians have this perverse desire to keep Toronto as some 19th century village. Prophetically, allaboutmatt remarked:
In another post in the "I HATE Toronto" thread, it was pointed out by myself and others that a good chunk of Torontonians have this perverse desire to keep Toronto as some 19th century village. Prophetically, allaboutmatt remarked:
barrytron3030
Active Member
obviously i am not against high-rises. still i happen to love manhattan's 6-10 story buildings. absolutely beautiful and completely distinct. i wish toronto had more of these classic buildings. it's what i wish yonge sometimes looked like. of course, king, bay, front and yonge did have quite a few of these buildings before the great fire or the great destruction of the 60's and 70's happened.
toronto is interesting because we can't just build incredibly tall buildins anywhere. we have to deal with existing neighbourhoods (thank god, or whatever power you believe in) and the nature of districts. i mean, could you imagine building a 50 storey tower in cabbagetown or the annex? sacrilege. as much as i love tall buildings, we don't need them everywhere. i would much prefer beautiful buildings in general.
toronto is interesting because we can't just build incredibly tall buildins anywhere. we have to deal with existing neighbourhoods (thank god, or whatever power you believe in) and the nature of districts. i mean, could you imagine building a 50 storey tower in cabbagetown or the annex? sacrilege. as much as i love tall buildings, we don't need them everywhere. i would much prefer beautiful buildings in general.
Ramako
Moderator
This suggestion is asinine.
If there's one spot in the entire country where highrises should not be banned, it's in our largest city. That's what cities are for. If you don't like it, move to PEI.
If there's one spot in the entire country where highrises should not be banned, it's in our largest city. That's what cities are for. If you don't like it, move to PEI.
Archivist
Senior Member
Given that Golden hasn't made a reappearance in this thread, it's clearly trolling.
Granny
Active Member
I can only assume this comment was thrown out as bait. Block sunlight?? Wind tunnels?
Quick as you can everybody. Were heading to Bowmanville.
No mussed up hair or possibility of getting scurvy or rickets out there.
...Is it just me or is this a strange thread. This winter is starting to take it's toll on us, I think.
jks
Continuous Lurker
Banned???
unimaginative2
Senior Member
It's potentially an interesting discussion, though, on how much Toronto's planning culture has changed. When David Crombie was elected, he imposed a very popular universal 45-foot height limit. Such a proposal is unthinkable today. Moreover, the people who would oppose it are the very people who would have likely supported Crombie. It's the same with Jack Layton fighting against the DRL back in the 80s because it would bring more development downtown. There was a real anti-development sentiment that seems to be almost completely dead.
W. K. Lis
Superstar
Banning buildings more than 4 or 6 stories is ridiculous. (Anyways, the fire truck ladders reach to the 7th story.) My sister-in-law lives on a 15th floor condo. I used to live on the 21st floor of a condo, before moving to my own house. There are people who prefer condo or apartment living.
There are some badly designed buildings, but what I like could be different than what you like.
Myself, I would prefer to see high rise buildings along the main arterial roads, but with stores on the street level, offices on the 2nd and 3rd, and residential above that. No visible parking out front, but in back for customers (using meters) and underground for residents.
There are some badly designed buildings, but what I like could be different than what you like.
Myself, I would prefer to see high rise buildings along the main arterial roads, but with stores on the street level, offices on the 2nd and 3rd, and residential above that. No visible parking out front, but in back for customers (using meters) and underground for residents.
egotrippin
Senior Member
This ranks up there with the stupidest threads I've seen (based on the original post, not necessarily the following comments). Also, what in bloody hell would ensure that buildings capped to 4, or 6, storeys would all of a sudden become inspiring and well-designed. None of this makes sense, why am I even here. This thread should be deleted on the basis of its stupidity.
adma
Superstar
Remember, too, that Crombie's 45 foot limit was more of a very-much-of-the-moment "catching breath in lieu of a new city plan" tactic, which was less anti-development than anti a certain type and tactical approach to development. I don't think that either Crombie or Layton or even Jane Jacobs were absolute dogmatists to that end--45 feet is absurdly short, after all. It's more what you'd expect from Hamish Wilson-type blog comments.
As a very general rule of thumb, though, the planning-policy rethink sparked by the height limit led to the St Lawrence Neighbourhood; and it also explains why Village By The Grange takes the form it does, rather than the form of the 70s St James Town extension blocks along Sherbourne. And who knows what the Eaton Centre zone might have looked like had its conception, never mind its construction, happened more thoroughly within the Crombie era; we might have a two-sided surviving Yonge streetscape to deal with today...
doady
Senior Member
You could also go to Paris (France, not Ontario). Not many high-rises there, but it is still far denser and more urban than Toronto.
urbanboom
Active Member
^
Downtown Paris began nearly 1000 years ago. What they have there were considered "Tall Towers" at one point. If they could have tall towers like us, they would've. That's why they built "La Defence" or why London built "Canary Wharf": For land that's valued so highly, it makes sense to build up.
Downtown Paris began nearly 1000 years ago. What they have there were considered "Tall Towers" at one point. If they could have tall towers like us, they would've. That's why they built "La Defence" or why London built "Canary Wharf": For land that's valued so highly, it makes sense to build up.