jje1000
Senior Member
How is being concerned about the loss of parking space anti-development?
Toronto The Pemberton | 215.79m | 68s | Pemberton | a—A
- Thread starter greenleaf
- Start date
How is being concerned about the loss of parking space anti-development?
fedplanner
Active Member
Her ward is built-out. Where else can development take place?
Alarmed about loss of parking but dropped the ball here. She pleaded ignorance on the latter...
Xray_Crystal_Junkie
Senior Member
Well for starters it sits directly on two subway lines with the busiest station in the whole system.
But OK, for those that need cars, how is this:
1) Massive above-ground parking at Hayden and Yonge
2) Impark at Bay and Charles
3) Under the Manulife Centre
4) Underground on Sultan, south of Bloor, west of St Thomas
5) Complex on Yorkville Ave just west of Bay (you could hit it with a stone from this site)
6) Hudson's Bay Centre off Asquith
I'm sure I've missed a few in the area. And hell it's only a temporary loss. My bet is there are some angry locals that are just getting over the mess at 4S and a few more that might lose a nice view. I have yet to hear a nice thing from her about any potential development.
Worried over a loss of parking in and around Yorkville? Laughable. Hell, be better if they didn't replace the parking. Vive la pedestrian!
But OK, for those that need cars, how is this:
1) Massive above-ground parking at Hayden and Yonge
2) Impark at Bay and Charles
3) Under the Manulife Centre
4) Underground on Sultan, south of Bloor, west of St Thomas
5) Complex on Yorkville Ave just west of Bay (you could hit it with a stone from this site)
6) Hudson's Bay Centre off Asquith
I'm sure I've missed a few in the area. And hell it's only a temporary loss. My bet is there are some angry locals that are just getting over the mess at 4S and a few more that might lose a nice view. I have yet to hear a nice thing from her about any potential development.
Worried over a loss of parking in and around Yorkville? Laughable. Hell, be better if they didn't replace the parking. Vive la pedestrian!
CN Tower
Banned
That article is nearly a year old; published April 2012. I suspect planning (& the market) has changed considerably since.
fedplanner
Active Member
What exactly has changed? I'm not following.
agoraflaneur
Active Member
From the article:
This makes clear that she is worried about parking but sees the positives of the development from an overall capital allocation perspective.
I don't know too much about Wong-Tam, but in the various threads it seems to me that she is for some developments but cautious on others. As a politician, there is always more to gain by saying you are worried about things that will affect current residents. That is all she is doing. I see no evidence that she opposes the development, only that she hedges it by respecting people's opposition while pointing out the benefits.
Rather better for her than saying: get out of the way another tower is coming whooopeeeee! (though that may be my feeling, and I for one would not shed a single tear for the loss of the entire lot)
This makes clear that she is worried about parking but sees the positives of the development from an overall capital allocation perspective.
I don't know too much about Wong-Tam, but in the various threads it seems to me that she is for some developments but cautious on others. As a politician, there is always more to gain by saying you are worried about things that will affect current residents. That is all she is doing. I see no evidence that she opposes the development, only that she hedges it by respecting people's opposition while pointing out the benefits.
Rather better for her than saying: get out of the way another tower is coming whooopeeeee! (though that may be my feeling, and I for one would not shed a single tear for the loss of the entire lot)
Last edited:
SP!RE
°°°°°°
Very selective quotation you made there, leaving out the rest.
Also, she's a politician. Even if she's in favour of development at this location, she needs to be diplomatic and think things through from a variety of perspectives (or at least speak diplomatically about these issues) so that everyone in her ward (including business-owners) feel heard and represented.
Last edited:
wolfewood
Active Member
What are you saying bro? You suggesting that Wong-Tam, Adams and Chow aren't the devil incarnate? You be tripping balls bro. DAE Wong-Tam, Adams and Chow?!?!!11!!
Seriously getting sick of the skyscraper and capitalist fan boys who would gladly remove the CN Tower if it meant an even bigger office tower in it's place. It's not anti-development to actually take a minute to think about the effects a project might have on a neighbourhood instead of just letting developers ride roughshod over the city.
Seriously getting sick of the skyscraper and capitalist fan boys who would gladly remove the CN Tower if it meant an even bigger office tower in it's place. It's not anti-development to actually take a minute to think about the effects a project might have on a neighbourhood instead of just letting developers ride roughshod over the city.
lovarkitec
New Member
DtTO
Active Member
I expect this from KWT. She was also "concerned" about shadowing on Jesse Ketchum PS when the plans for the Holt Renfrew site were revealed.
The fact that you just compared the CN Tower to a 1970s parking garage in the city's most upscale area is ridiculous, and laughable. When an opportunity to add more retail, residences, and most importantly, people, to an area where a garage currently exists, I'm all for it.
As for KWT doing the right thing as a politician, I think that she should've reviewed the proposal and realized that there's more than enough parking in the area (especially with the decreasing use of personal vehicles) to justify the loss of one parking garage. Especially considering that the parking garage would've presumably been out of service for repairs, she should've never publicized such an ignorant opinion, which will sadly resonate with all the NIMBYs just looking for an excuse to oppose any sort of progression.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
Bingo.
+1
Yes, KWT should censor herself so that the NIMBYs (that one big, varied group of people that are lumped into one on UT) don't take it and run with it. Right...
Last edited:
Blovertis
Active Member
"There go the people. I must follow them, for I am their leader."
Your use of the word "hedge" (seemingly approvingly!) says it all. You've just provided a perfect illustration of why people are cynical about politicians. Here is a "downtown" councillor who is not sure whether she favors the elimination of a parking garage at the intersection of the two busiest transit lines in Canada.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
Did you not understand agoraflaneur's post? I can assure you KWT is almost certainly in favour of replacing parking garages or anything that brings life and vitality to a neighbourhood.
But she has to speak diplomatically and pay penance to the opposing side's point of view. If not, she'll get jumped on, attacked, and not voted in the next time around.
I can't believe how little familiarity some of you guys have with the concept of diplomacy. (i.e. For a crude, off-the-top-of-my-head-example, President Obama might early on have kept quiet about his support for gay marriage, but it was his silence that kept his detractors at bay while many states made strides on gay marriage. Had he spoken up too soon, he could have lost a LOT of support, and the movement towards gay marriage could have been lost. Yeesh I don't like that example because I am far from an Obama fan, but there you have it. Diplomacy at work.)
I can't believe how KWT is criticized as leading a war on the car by one side, and the next moment people here at UT are jumping to conclusions that she is some sort of hardcore pro-parking-garage warrior. Chill, guys.
Last edited:
Blovertis
Active Member
"Self-censorship" is a red herring here. We are merely calling her out on nonsensical statements that don't jibe with the urban, transit-centric principles she's previously endorsed.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
She represents all people in her ward, including the Yorkville business-owners, some of whom have unreasonable parking expectations. Thus, she has to throw them a bone as well.