scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Apparently, they're a disgrace because they're not dense enough. Therefore, we'll be world class once we have Kowloon-like densities on our important roads.
|
|
|
Bagless grocery shopping? (Loblaws Milton)
- Thread starter vistaway
- Start date
RJR123
Active Member
As I mentioned in my previous post, I'm not demonizing the people that live in these developments. What is depressing is the physical environs of these new cities, and the car dependency that results. From there, a whole host of problems arise...emissions, obesity, road rage, etc.
Regarding your reference to New York and Paris in your post, all I said is that if a city the physical size of New York can support the millions of people it does, then Toronto has a long way to go in terms of realizing greater density. Not sure where your Paris reference came from, and the Kowloon reference that you're obsessed with is a complete red herring.
Oh yeah, and I'd take a million Bay Streets over the garbage that's being built in communities such as Milton.
Regarding your reference to New York and Paris in your post, all I said is that if a city the physical size of New York can support the millions of people it does, then Toronto has a long way to go in terms of realizing greater density. Not sure where your Paris reference came from, and the Kowloon reference that you're obsessed with is a complete red herring.
Oh yeah, and I'd take a million Bay Streets over the garbage that's being built in communities such as Milton.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
You'd take those million Bay Streets even though they'd be replacing Yonge, Danforth, etc.?
Anyway, I wasn't responding to just your comments, otherwise I'd have quoted you.
Anyway, I wasn't responding to just your comments, otherwise I'd have quoted you.
RJR123
Active Member
Of course I would never want to replace the vibrancy of Danforth, Yonge etc with a Bay St-type development. That's not even what I said...What I said is I would take Bay St over this crap in Milton, NOT Bay St over Danforth, Yonge...it's two totally different things.
So do you assume that if we add height to our main streets such as Yonge, Danforth etc. it will spell the death of them?
So do you assume that if we add height to our main streets such as Yonge, Danforth etc. it will spell the death of them?
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
The height is the red herring...it's the replacement of Yonge or Danforth that could pose the problem.
adma
Superstar
Yup: it isn't the raw adding of height, it's the idea of overfetishizing adding the height, and overpathologizing that which it replaces, and assuming one can do that while blithely brushing aside neighbourhood objections as mere NIMBYism...
RJR123
Active Member
OK, well let's just freeze the city in time forever, and allow garbage development such as above to multiply un-checked and continue to build out and out.
adma
Superstar
You ever think that even if you densify the Danforth, there's still people who'd rather choose this so-called garbage development building out and out?
RJR123
Active Member
For sure there would be, no doubt. My point was that there is still plenty of room to add density in the 416, which would hopefully increase availability/moderate price and drive more people back into the city proper. We're not even close to being built out in Toronto, yet we keep gobbling up more and more and more land to create areas such as those depicted in the Loblaws pics. It demonstrates that we have abandoned sound planning principles in favour of unchecked sprawl. That's all I'm sayin'.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Even if we went Avenue-crazy, Milton would still be getting its Loblaws.
RJR123
Active Member
Yep...fact of life! One can dream, I guess.