Toronto Concord Canada House | 231.97m | 74s | Concord Adex | Arcadis

"Cityplace is unilateral success"? It sucks at street level, but I guess that is an "elitist" remark.
 
If you finished my sentence, I say in terms, of a future livable city, and sustaining growth, and services to the citys core... Density is a must , to survive this next century.

Street level will improve over time, as retail and cafes come in.... $$$ follows footsteps.. I am not saying every design aspect is flawless...
But my point is ... middle class urban density, is an unthinkable approach to city planning, here in the Auto driven US...
When all is said and done and the dust settles.... How many people will live here??
I will guarantee, it will be more bustling than any sprawling cul de sac of track housing in Outer Mississauga. These people will fill these parks and waterfront, walk to Rogers center... Drink along Bremner, eat along Bremner. Any increase to downtowns population is a plus. Especially when you consider that we are accepting all tiers of society into the mix.
In fact this will be a youthful and exciting place to live. Maybe not for retirees or familys of 8, but who does that anymore??

It seems every time I post, some one wants to argue with me??
I was trying to crack a phallic joke... Instead I am back defending myself. Its like 6th grade all over again. :confused:
 
gristle said:
This one needs more hard information before it can be discussed in full. One would not want to engage in an fallacies or untruths regarding the imminent erection of this unfertile project.
Click to expand...

And there is no information because absolutely nothing has been designed for this project yet. Every rumour out there at the moment is based on negotiations currently going on with the city. The project is still in its preliminary stages. It could be one tower, it could be two towers in the end. Not even Concord has an answer yet. People need to lay off the little blue pill for a little while longer, as any speculation is premature.
 
gristle said:
"Cityplace is unilateral success"? It sucks at street level, but I guess that is an "elitist" remark.
Click to expand...

I never accused anyone of being elitist, but rather pointed out , a perception being held at other forums, about many forumers here.
I guess you must feel guilty of this behavior?
Again simply, to be signature here, will take 800 feet plus...
Due to the height that has come into this area, since this project was first announced 10 years ago!
Thats all I was saying. Its gonna be a lot harder to stand out now, then it was 10 years ago.
I am sure some one will disagree with me because apparently, many of you, think I am an idiot!! ???
 
gristle said:
"Cityplace is unilateral success"? It sucks at street level, but I guess that is an "elitist" remark.
Click to expand...

Actually it is the exact opposite of an "elitist" remark.
An "elitist" remark would be too equate Cityplace to St Jamestown because said person is too "cool" to live in Cityplace.
 
jetsbackincanada said:
If you finished my sentence, I say in terms, of a future livable city, and sustaining growth, and services to the citys core... Density is a must , to survive this next century.

Street level will improve over time, as retail and cafes come in.... $$$ follows footsteps.. I am not saying every design aspect is flawless...
But my point is ... middle class urban density, is an unthinkable approach to city planning, here in the Auto driven US...
When all is said and done and the dust settles.... How many people will live here??
I will guarantee, it will be more bustling than any sprawling cul de sac of track housing in Outer Mississauga. These people will fill these parks and waterfront, walk to Rogers center... Drink along Bremner, eat along Bremner. Any increase to downtowns population is a plus. Especially when you consider that we are accepting all tiers of society into the mix.
In fact this will be a youthful and exciting place to live. Maybe not for retirees or familys of 8, but who does that anymore??

It seems every time I post, some one wants to argue with me??
I was trying to crack a phallic joke... Instead I am back defending myself. Its like 6th grade all over again. :confused:
Click to expand...

I, for one, agree with you.
 
Well thank you sir..

That is refreshing...

Amazing how much greif I take for embracing what this city is doing!!
As a whole Toronto has a plan, that is forward thinking, and I think it is marvelous!
Not every tower is gonna be grand. But they all add to the urban fabric, which I support whole heartedly.
If I owned a cafe or a bar, or any other retail, I would embrace all the customers, towers add to my block!!
People who fight height and density, in the core, should not live there. Quaint is not an attribute of urban density. :rolleyes: Elmira can be quaint!
 
The problem with the density argument is that all the condos in the world aren't enough to sustain a real, diverse urban retail street. Queen West, for example, has a catchment area of millions. Even tens of thousands of condo units won't support a small niche store. Moreover, local condo residents don't want diverse, unique stores--they understandably want things that they will use every day, like groceries and dry cleaners. That's why all these claims that a few hundred condo units will liven up the Distillery in Winter are absurd: these people aren't going to be buying high-end art and sound systems every day.

I wouldn't be quite so confident that condo retail will eventually evolve into something more interesting and attractive. While some might make themselves more open to adaptation and modification, others seem quite impervious to change. Look at the Bay and Wellesley area. Those condos have been around for 20 years, and the area's as bleak as ever.
 
unimaginative2 said:
The problem with the density argument is that all the condos in the world aren't enough to sustain a real, diverse urban retail street. Queen West, for example, has a catchment area of millions. Even tens of thousands of condo units won't support a small niche store. Moreover, local condo residents don't want diverse, unique stores--they understandably want things that they will use every day, like groceries and dry cleaners. That's why all these claims that a few hundred condo units will liven up the Distillery in Winter are absurd: these people aren't going to be buying high-end art and sound systems every day.

I wouldn't be quite so confident that condo retail will eventually evolve into something more interesting and attractive. While some might make themselves more open to adaptation and modification, others seem quite impervious to change. Look at the Bay and Wellesley area. Those condos have been around for 20 years, and the area's as bleak as ever.
Click to expand...

Well, the ENTIRE downtown Minneapolis, is bleak as hell, after 6 pm. EVERY DAY!!!!!!! Empty streets, bars and restaraunts. Much of downtown, isnt even open after 6 or on weekends... and aside from 1st Ave warehouse ent./ district, the whole area dies when the cars all leave after work!!
St Paul IS WAY WORSE>
Bleak is relative my friend, New York Chicago and Toronto, are the best urban experiences going in NA!
Until you have kicked tumbleweeds from the sidewalk as you walk to your car, and seen how empty a street canyon is, WITH NO PEDESTRIANS, you really cant complain. I can not tell you how unsafe an alley feels when the streets are empty. People = safety.
There are so many urban centers here, that are just hollowed out by sprawl.

You people are spoiled!!! Thats ok, I guess... but street cars vs freeways?? Frontage roads vs riding my Bike?? Give me ALL The condos you can build in the core!!! It just makes the city so fun and vibrant!
 
Last edited:
^ What he said. I have become convinced that many of the people who post here are more than a little spoiled by the incredible bounty of new construction going on in Toronto. Every new project that comes along gets compared to the very best projects in the world, and when they fail to measure up to that impossibly high standard (as can be almost always expected in ANY city in the world, considering that most projects have to be affordable for ordinary buyers) they are derided as "just another boring box", even if they are far from box-like.
 
Yes, I agree that Toronto is much better than places like downtown Minneapolis. That's why I don't think we should compare ourselves to cities like that and why I don't think solutions like increased downtown residential, which might well be very beneficial in downtown Minneapolis, are relevant in Toronto where most of these problems have already been solved.

I live in New York, and many of the most interesting places in the city have among the lowest densities. The highest density areas are often comparatively deserted.

I'm not saying that density is inherently a bad thing. I'm just saying that it isn't a panacea.
 
Exactly!!!!!!

Mongo said:
^ What he said. I have become convinced that many of the people who post here are more than a little spoiled by the incredible bounty of new construction going on in Toronto. Every new project that comes along gets compared to the very best projects in the world, and when they fail to measure up to that impossibly high standard (as can be almost always expected in ANY city in the world, considering that most projects have to be affordable for ordinary buyers) they are derided as "just another boring box", even if they are far from box-like.
Click to expand...

That is so much my point of frustration. Its a good thing to built tall, and not just cause I love height.
All the negativity, it just gets a little redundant.
There are high end projects being built. FS SL Trump, 1 St Thomas etc... ( On par with anything anywhere) but the Uptowns, and Cityplaces are as exciting, for the mix they bring into the city.
Your point is exact, affordable means lil bit ordinary, the guilded gold lobbys, and ivory castles, are for Dubai, and for empires after the spoils of war have been cashed!!! (think Eygpt, Rome, 1920's New York!) (Like it or not, the first world war, can be fully realized, in the guilded cathedrals of 1920s NYC commerce)
Toronto is a great and shining model, for NA citys, and the demand up there, also speaks of a culture ( as a nation) that has embraced the Asian model of urbanity, from the school room, to the board room, to the seats of politics!
 
unimaginative2 said:
Yes, I agree that Toronto is much better than places like downtown Minneapolis. That's why I don't think we should compare ourselves to cities like that and why I don't think solutions like increased downtown residential, which might well be very beneficial in downtown Minneapolis, are relevant in Toronto where most of these problems have already been solved.

I live in New York, and many of the most interesting places in the city have among the lowest densities. The highest density areas are often comparatively deserted.

I'm not saying that density is inherently a bad thing. I'm just saying that it isn't a panacea.
Click to expand...

I would say that the Villiage, So Ho and Tribeca, and the upper west side, are the most interesting neighborhoods, and are as dense as any part of Wall St, or Midtown. (In terms of pop /sq mile) I would guess that per Sq Mile, the lack of office there makes them as dense as the tallest areas??? Midtown does have a lot of res. But downtown not as much??

Anyway, we seem to agree that population density, is equatable to livability. In so many ways. As simple as the tax base to spending ratio, safety, and of course excitement.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top