I realize I'm feeding the beast, but I like the 2 and 3-storey characteristic of Danforth/Bloor/Queen and so on. I would hate to see these go in the name of redevelopment. This is why I'm such a strong believer of dense development on vacant and underutilized lots. It takes the development pressure from areas that are worth preserving.
The whole point of building subways is to make it possible for a lot more people to lhave easy access to rapid transit, so with the exception of Queen St, Yonge, Bloor and Danforth naturally should go highrises.
I agree that the priority should be development of vacant lots, but there are not enough of them, are there? Why do we spend billions of $ to construct a subway yet only a handful of residents end up living within walking distance from its stations, does it make sense to you?
You like to see the characters of the low rise neighbourhood on Bloor W and danforth. Well, the city shouldn't circle around what you want to
see. It needs to
function the best way it can.
I like the idea of midrises too, but they simply don't provide enough units because there is not enough land for them, unless of course most of the low rises are gone.
Speaking of the 2-3 stories characteristics, can't you see that they don't have to be maintained when they are so close to subway lines? A little bit farther away (say 1000M or more), you can keep all the 2 stories you want, and that's still like 90% of the space. Still not enough? Do we really want nothing but 2-3 storey characteristics at Yonge/Davisville, Bloor/Bathurst, or Danforth/Broadview? Doesn't the city have enough of these
characteristics elsewhere? Doesn't people's need to live close to rapid transit trump some people's desire (who don't even live in these areas) to keep the appeal of the old city in the 1920's?
As to Queen St West between University and say Ossington, the issue is most buildings are ill-maintained and look bad. They don't scream one of the most import commercial streets in downtown Toronto. If they all look like those red brick midrises on King East, I am totally fine with it. Additionally, I am not sure how much historic or architecture value those houses really hold. Just because they are built 100 years ago doesn't mean we should keep them forever. When the need to urbanization and densification reaches a certain point, I am afraid an entire downtown street composed of primarily 1-3 storey houses (Queen, Bathurst, Dundas) will stop making sense. I am not talking about building 40 storey glass boxes everywhere, but won't 4-10 story well built mixed-use midrises provide 10 times the economic benefits, living space and employment for the people of Toronto?
I am sorry if I am seen as biased or "anti-heritage" I just don't think so many lowrises in either downtown or along our subway lines make much sense. Paris and Vienna don't have many highrises, but they have very few 1-3 storey lowrises too. Lowrises seldom make sense in big cities just because they are a gigantic waste of prime space.