|
|
|
Planned Sprawl in the GTA
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
lenaitch
Senior Member
I wonder who dreamed that map up. It must be somewhat dated and only partially shows the rail lines around the city. In order to support a commuter rail line you need a requisite number of people who commute. I'm not sure many of the 2,000 people who live in Gimli head to the city on a regular basis, and Thunder Bay is 700km away. An argument for intercity service perhaps but hardly commuter.
WislaHD
Superstar
Proposed Veraine community in northeast Pickering flies into the development radar
www.durhamregion.com
A new master-planned community coming to Pickering.
www.veraine.com
Lots of renderings in that video.
Proposed Veraine community in northeast Pickering flies into the development radar
The issue: Dorsay Development Corp. has proposed to build a master-planned community in northeast Pickering The impact: The vision of the project is to create a sustainable and affordable community...
www.durhamregion.com
A new master-planned community coming to Pickering.
Veraine, a master-planned community | Pickering
Welcome to Veraine, a master-planned community to be built in Pickering that will thrive with diversity and opportunity. From housing to employment to entertainment, the world will be brought to Veraine.
Lots of renderings in that video.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Looks like a ploy by the land owner in an attempt to bring the lands into the urban area. Right now they are whitebelt - which means aren't planned to be developed until probably 2041 or so.. They are probably trying to bring that timeline up by shining a few fancy renderings in front of Pickering Council.
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Proposed Veraine community in northeast Pickering flies into the development radar
Proposed Veraine community in northeast Pickering flies into the development radar
The issue: Dorsay Development Corp. has proposed to build a master-planned community in northeast Pickering The impact: The vision of the project is to create a sustainable and affordable community...
A new master-planned community coming to Pickering.
Veraine, a master-planned community | Pickering
Welcome to Veraine, a master-planned community to be built in Pickering that will thrive with diversity and opportunity. From housing to employment to entertainment, the world will be brought to Veraine.
Lots of renderings in that video.
I read about this last week in the Pickering News Advertiser (emphasis on Advertiser).
Why is this even a thing WHEN MOST OF TORONTO IS SFH?
Developers, planners, politicians will all talk a bag of shit about how we're doing things differently now and yet we keep getting more and more non-urban land ruined when there's already enough land that can be redeveloped and house another 2-4 million people, easily.
Same old shit, different pile.
Lipstick. Pig. blah blah
Northern Light
Superstar
You're quite right.
This is still more farmland being taken away, good stuff too.
The notion of green-friendliness is swell; but let's be clear, as compared to current use, this site will be a net loss for the environment; merely less bad that it might have been with a more conventional development.
****
Its happening because green-field is still easier than dealing with the pre-existing.
I might argue for picking a section of East York bungalows and wiping them out in favour of midrise on Mortimer, Cosburn and O'Connor with stacked townhomes in between.
But doing so at scale, means government would have to expropriate, as assembly at that scale would be time consuming and costly.
Government would have to do the masterplanning on its own or in conjunction with a developer; the upfront cost of that land would be much higher; and some existing infrastructure (roads, sewers, hydro poles etc etc.) would have to come out
to make way for altered layouts and alignments.
In the end, that would be more sustainable and desirable; but with with a cost of several billion, and oodles more complexity and hassle; greenfield remains the more tempting target for private money and government alike.
Last edited:
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
As a society, we cocked up, big time. Time to take responsibility for that collectively and make it right.
Laziness and greed are destructive characteristics indeed.
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Seriously.......this shit bothers me so much. Part of it is because I'm a pseudo-hippy and all that, but my analytical and logical mind can't stand it either.
How many people would be able to live in Toronto if it had the same population density as, say, Paris?
Veraine, my left nut.
How many people would be able to live in Toronto if it had the same population density as, say, Paris?
Veraine, my left nut.
WislaHD
Superstar
Or some of the low-rise but high-density neighbourhoods in Montreal. We don't have to look far away.
As far as farmland goes, this one is not that bad to develop. Should the Midtown GO line ever be activated, it would extend through Malvern to Seaton to Veraine.
Don't get me wrong, I understand the sentiment you shared perfectly. But if we are picking a place to build a Veraine, this place isn't terrible.
But I agree with everything that's been said re: the Yellowbelt
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
The point is we don't need to build any Veraines.
In fact, the point is we shouldn't be building any Veraines until we've made proper use of already developed land.
The Yellow Belt is a piss stain on our collective soul and until it's wiped from the face of the Earth, leave yon prime farm land alone.
In fact, the point is we shouldn't be building any Veraines until we've made proper use of already developed land.
The Yellow Belt is a piss stain on our collective soul and until it's wiped from the face of the Earth, leave yon prime farm land alone.
Northern Light
Superstar
Its worth saying as this juncture that Paris is the most densely developed city in Europe.
Its population is 21,000 per km2
But, at the same time, Berlin is only 3,900 per km2
London is just over 5,000
Toronto is 4,400 and change.
I clearly do think we can and ought to raise our density number, but I also like parkland, which we have a lot more of than Paris, and Paris also has a lot less permeability which impacts on water quality, less tree canopy.
If we used London as our target, and grew our population as currently projected; we will hit London-level density within 5-6 years.
We could be more ambitious still, and probably should............but again, I don't think Paris is actually the right target.
The thing in Toronto is we tend to do hyper-dense, as in downtown, mid-town and North York at Yonge and at Bessarion or very low density.
That creates odd quirks of 1/2 empty schools in parts of Etobicoke and Scarborough, and schools bursting at the seems at Yonge/Eg, downtown and parts of East York.
I think we should probably be looking to get density into the 1/2 of Paris range, or about 10,000 per km2
Here, let's note the current projections for Toronto will put us north of 4,000,000 people, in the City proper, in 12-20 years.
That would yield a density of 6,350 per km2.
Making us denser than most European cities.
Also the much vaunted comparison to Montreal........they are 4,500 per km2 or barely any denser than Toronto (far fewer skyscrapers)
Just a bit of contextual perspective.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Not that AGE and HISTORY are the only factors with this stuff but bear in mind that both Paris and Rome date to, like, Roman times.
Given that Toronto is only 150+ years old and given that most of our development is really in the past 50 years or so, our 4,400 ain't bad. I'm sure that by the time we're 2,000 years old we'll be able to hit that Paris target, if we're not all underwater by then.
Given that Toronto is only 150+ years old and given that most of our development is really in the past 50 years or so, our 4,400 ain't bad. I'm sure that by the time we're 2,000 years old we'll be able to hit that Paris target, if we're not all underwater by then.
WislaHD
Superstar
Interesting that this conversation surfaced right when John Lorinc drops this latest article:
Toronto’s missing middle should be built along collector roads
I don't think it should be an either/or as the Yellowbelt still needs to be addressed, but the premise here certainly adds fuel to the discussion.
Toronto’s missing middle should be built along collector roads
Toronto's missing middle should be built along collector roads - Spacing Toronto
Much of the conversation about missing middle development in Toronto has been focused on how to smuggle additional housing units into residential areas without running afoul of NIMBY neighbours. This focus is in some ways understandable, given that the scale of building in question — somewhere...
spacing.ca
I don't think it should be an either/or as the Yellowbelt still needs to be addressed, but the premise here certainly adds fuel to the discussion.
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Yeah, I just pulled Paris out of me arse as an example that I knew was on the high end of density.
10k is probably a very reasonable number.
I mean, the population density number isn't at all important as a specific target...it's the damn waste of space that the vast sea of SFHs that needs to be addressed and rectified as much as possible before building any "sustainable" suburbs.
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
That has nothing to do with it.
The fact that the 50s (mostly) saw an explosion of wasting land because everyone and their mum came to expect SFH ownership (and whatever other misguided reasons) has nothing to do with the city's age.
Or it does, I guess, because the age during which most of the growth started or took place determines the social and development norms of the time, but the age of the city sure as hell isn't a valid excuse for it.