Toronto Ridiculous NIMBYism thread

[the lemur]

Indeed. And notice how that whole affordability argument came up again. There is nothing affordable about living in a single detached house this close to the core going forward, ever. In fact, the inability to densify only serves to limit the amount of housing in the neighbourhood, which could only drive up prices. I just love how all these self-interest wrap themselves up in all that altruistic BS.

That's when they bother to define what they'd like to see instead of increased density, midrise development and condos in general. 'Uh, more single-family semis like the one I live in but couldn't afford to buy if it were on the market now, just to keep out the lower-income people I am ineffably scared of for some reason'.

The property at the centre of the Ossington kerfuffle is currently a U-Haul lot.

 

[the lemur]

"This public information poster is from the "Don't" campaign, which started in 1973.

The council became increasingly concerned that citizens were too actively involved in 'doing.'
Because 'doing' is a morally and politically ambiguous activity the council decided to take control and enforced 'not doing' until they could clarify and ratify only positive, socially acceptable expressions of 'doing.'"

There are definitely radicalized NIMBYs that would support such a policy.

Yep. There's a certain stratum of society that views any kind of 'activism' against the status quo as suspect because, well, things are fine as they are. You're not supposed to be active. You're supposed to sit there and accept it as it is. Wanting to change things is baaad, unless you want to change things back to the good old days.

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Is there a pic of the "vertical duplex" from the front? It looks like they rebuilt half a semi which is a little bizarre. I would be pretty annoyed if my neighbour built a three storey black box that looked like that!

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the front:

AoD

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

I love the fact that her NIMBY-ness rejects the NIMBY label as pejorative. Yes, yes it is. Yes, yes you are.

With the exception of the fact this has two entrances, it looks exactly like every other reno in the city.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I love the fact that her NIMBY-ness rejects the NIMBY label as pejorative. Yes, yes it is. Yes, yes you are.

With the exception of the fact this has two entrances, it looks exactly like every other reno in the city.

Don't like NIMBY? Try BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything) or CAVE (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) instead.

AoD

 

[doady]

I don't think NIMBY has to be a perjorative. Jane Jacobs opposed the Spadina and Lower Manhattan Expressways. Was that a bad thing? That's led to community activism today including NIMBYism. Bottom-up approach instead of top-down. Should planning go back to the top-down approach?

It is not bad for people to be concerned about their environment and their neighbourhood and have the power to shape them. Activism is not a bad. It is only bad when people are petty and selfish and alarmist. Like complaining about water balloons in a park or the devastating effect of a single 3-storey house on an area's property values. C'mon...

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Thanks AoD. While it is sort of ugly in a "modernist on the cheap" way, it's hardly a blight on the landscape.

It's a pity that someone didn't buy up all of those houses on the east side and build an entire row of stacked townhouses. Those pseudo second empire semis are generally tiny and have little historical merit.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

It's a pity that someone didn't buy up all of those houses on the east side and build an entire row of stacked townhouses. Those pseudo second empire semis are generally tiny and have little historical merit.

Who would be masochistic enough to take the time and money to do that one at a time (assuming that all of them will sell), put forward an application to build an extra story or two and still get flack from the area residents for turning the neighbourhood into hell?

AoD

 

[nfitz]

What is so objectionable about the size of the building in the photo? It doesn't appear to be notably higher than its neighbours.

Agreed. One of these got built near me recently (on a lot that had always been vacant - kind of odd, given the most of the houses date from WW1). With the first unit on the ground and 2nd (and perhaps slightly dug into it), and the second unit on the 3rd or 4th, it's only a shade higher than the adjacent 2-story house, with a small room on the 3rd story. Looks fine.

The issue in the story is that it's raising house prices nearby. Oh my gosh.

And more people competing for on-street parking.

Good grief ... classic NIMBYism.

 

[momofboyz]

Why are people complaining about kids here???

The house is so narrow!!

 

[DarnDirtyApe]

Who would be masochistic enough to take the time and money to do that one at a time (assuming that all of them will sell), put forward an application to build an extra story or two and still get flack from the area residents for turning the neighbourhood into hell?

AoD

I know what you mean - from a practical perspective it's way too difficult - but it would be so much easier (and more profitable) to build eight of these at once rather than just one. If they can sell each duplex for a combined $2.2MM they should be able to turn a profit fairly easily.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Something that adults never do.

Can we have a moment of silence for retail workers please?

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Last week we had Ossington's vertical duplexes.

This week we have Lawrence Park in a fright over what they are called "rowplexes"


Residents and councillor concerned about 22 townhomes proposed on Lawrence
http://www.postcity.com/Eat-Shop-Do...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Councilor Robinson is quick yet again to defend NIMBYs:

“It’s the built form that’s concerning people the most and the sheer volume that’s being proposed. It’s such a massive stretch from what is currently in that neighbourhood,” said Robinson. “We’re all hopeful that it doesn’t go through,” she added.

I'm really starting to turn against Robinson in this new council term.

 

[Armour]

I found her to be really responsive and genuinely enthusiastic when I would contact her last term, but she hasn't responded to one of several messasges I've sent her in the last year.