Apologies if I added fuel to the "why can't Toronto do X" fire. I get tired of all the constant complaints, and as I said I'm most often pro-height. I know all of the technical planning reasons why height results from our processes, as well as the financial reasons for developers. Obviously ROI will be maximized in most cases, which most often means maximizing height. And I recognize that we have a subway station at University, making this a good stretch for redevelopment, which is why I am in favour in principle.
But not many addressed my primary worry, which is the resulting built form. Do posters truly believe that an elegant solution to College across from the university is to have random 30s towers? Again, these towers are just going to be stranded amid a sea of mostly 4s and 3s buildings. Also the heritage buildings on the street are gems (especially between Beverley and Spadina). We don't have to be Haussman to enact smart urban policy that builds our city. Vancouver limits the height of all its tall buildings with view cone measures.
In general I am thoroughly enjoying our present building boom. I love the scale of development between Spadina and Bathurst from Queen to Front, or the downtown east in general. The emerging scale is great with Axiom and River City etc. I support height in the Entertainment District, especially with Mirvish or to add variety to the 157 metre plateau. And I wish we would have more height (but not necessarily more density) on sites like 1 Yonge. I just enjoy a bit of variety, and a transitional mid rise neighbourhood is right up my alley.
Innsert: strangely enough I took Kingston Rd to Rouge Park for the first time last week (as part of a free Panamania aboriginal bus tour) and was impressed by the development there. Lots of great projects in Leslieville too.
arvelomcquaig: I have read many of your posts and most often agree with you, so I would be interested in your height filled vision for the area: what would be your ideal way to develop this 'hood?
