Toronto Ridiculous NIMBYism thread

[howl]

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:



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

The irony is many of those houses fronting Lawrence near Yonge have been converted to rental apartments because homeowners don't want to live so close to such a busy street. A properly designed row of townhouses, with parking access from the back (e.g. not directly off Lawrence) and sound-proofed windows at the front, makes a lot of sense. The only thing that makes more sense in that location would be a mid-rise apartment building.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Great article on how "activism" lead to housing affordability issues in SF:

http://www.citylab.com/housing/2015...th-san-francisco/399506/?utm_source=SFTwitter

AoD

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

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:

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

"although current zoning does allow for townhomes, Janet Griffin, director of development with the Lawrence Park Ratepayers’ Association (LPRA), believes the development is actually more similar to a midrise condominium. “To call it anything other than that is utterly disingenuous on the part of the developer,” she said."

That's kind of an awesome quote. I think the developer should call her bluff and go to the OMB for a proper 7-story midrise condo. "You think that's a condo? THIS is a condo!!"

 

[TheTigerMaster]

How is that development anything like a midrise condominium?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

"although current zoning does allow for townhomes, Janet Griffin, director of development with the Lawrence Park Ratepayers’ Association (LPRA), believes the development is actually more similar to a midrise condominium. “To call it anything other than that is utterly disingenuous on the part of the developer,” she said."

That's kind of an awesome quote. I think the developer should call her bluff and go to the OMB for a proper 7-story midrise condo. "You think that's a condo? THIS is a condo!!"

Ha. That's been my attitude with all these NIMBY stories.

Don't like poor people? Let's double the amount of affordable housing units! To tall? Apply for even more height!

It's purely out of spite and definitely now how we should be planning. Be glad that I'm not head of City Planning

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Peoples preceptions of low, mid, and high rise vary greatly. Here in Vaughan/Woodbrige where 2 story homes dominate residents call a 17 story condo a high rise. It's a poorly defined classification and used by the Councillor in a poor attempt to strengthen her case.

However Low, Mid, High rise should certainly be contextual. In Downtown toronto a high rise is anything over 35 stories, Mid rise is 15 to 35 stores, and low rise is less than 15 stories. In suburban nodes though a high rise might max out at 30 stories.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

However Low, Mid, High rise should certainly be contextual. In Downtown toronto a high rise is anything over 35 stories, Mid rise is 15 to 35 stores, and low rise is less than 15 stories. In suburban nodes though a high rise might max out at 30 stories.

That variable classification doesn't really make a huge amount of sense from a form/urban design perspective- even in Toronto, 15-35 isn't really a mid-rise - they are highrises that are on the short end of the scale. Along similar lines, calling something 15s a low-rise doesn't quite work either, considering the range of built forms you can have from 2s houses all the way to walk-ups, slabs and quasi-towers.

Protip for NIMBYies - forget calling 4s mid-rises, they should have went for they doubled the height (from 2 to 4s!!) in the neighbourhood instead.

AoD

 

[SunriseChampion]

I saw lawn signs up yesterday along Glencairn, protesting some sort of "massive" development at the corner with Bathurst.
I honestly don't understand why people are so bothered about what is being built around them. When I moved into my flat at 150 Sudbury Street (I can't believe I still live in this shitbox), they were nearing completion on twin towers to the east of us as well as starting to build 38 Abell Street, just to the south of me. I've lived in a construction zone for the last two years...not to mention the 38 Abell Street building cut off the last view I had of the horizon. Now all I see is towers from my terrace. In any case, why would I let any of this bother me? It is what it is, and it is a good use of the space (though, I still cry for the beautiful warehouse residences that used to occupy this space) and there's nothing I can do about it....though, even if there was, I don't see a problem with it in the first place.

Why are people so allergic to change? Do they not realise how toxic stagnation is?

This also reminds me of the hilarious incidences in the Pickering news about locals crying about a proposed cell tower going up here or there. I bet it's the same losers who cry the most about poor mobile phone reception.

I can't take people who live in urban areas seriously when they cry about the evolution of said urban areas.

 

[James]

The NIMBYism does go both ways. The underlying theme really is that of change. The trend right now is focusing on "nicer" Toronto neighborhoods who are opposing a new style of "more affordable" housing developments that are not homogeneous with the majority of the neighborhood housing stock.

There are also the older, more mature neighborhoods where people complain of infill housing because it "ruins" the feel of the neighborhood. Unfortunately, resistance to change is everywhere.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Saw even more anti "massive" development east of Bathurst today.

With language like that, you'd think they were fighting against another iteration of Burj Khalifa.

 

[salsa]

In today's instalment of Toronto NIMBYsim, I give you...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...-angers-davenport-residents-1.3173449?cmp=rss

 

[diminutive]

Goddamn super bridges! Surely the Spadina Expressway of our generation.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Goddamn super bridges! Surely the Spadina Expressway of our generation.

David White, of the group Davenport Options, calls it a "super bridge" which he said "at its highest point would be three stories high and tower over people's homes."

3 stories high...towering over houses that are 2 stories high.

AoD

 

[salsa]

3 stories high...towering over houses that are 2 stories high.

AoD

Replace the homes with 3 storey vertical duplexes, Ossington style. Problem solved.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Replace the homes with 3 storey vertical duplexes, Ossington style.

Or condos. But then it would tower over the 3s bridge, and we can't have that for the outrage to continue.

AoD