Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse
Not if you aren't in the market for one of the homes it isn't. If you are then it's a concern if you can't find a home that you want, but we're talking about people who already have homes complaining about development in the area. So no, it isn't any of their business if a home they don't own and weren't in the process of buying is replaced with another home they don't own and also weren't in the process of buying.
And of course that's setting aside the whole, "let's pretend that all the people who need homes don't exist and that the demand is all investors" thing. But I realize that obsessing about investors is necessary to justify hostility toward development.
|
The post in summary is all about the affordable housing crisis and that owners are impeding building our way out of the crisis for taking an interest in their communities beyond what they own. Typical ultra pro development mentality on these forums that is so short sighted. FFS, The affordable housing crisis is not a housing supply issue. There's thousands of units for rent at any time in Toronto. This isn't like the East Coast of Canada. Housing for the sake of housing that doesn't provide desirable family housing and leaches on well established, desirable family neighbourhoods is going to be a negative on immigration whether its quality or quantity. For Canada's sake, hopefully it's quantity than quality. We simply can't afford to bring in 450,000 people a year that are less likely to contribute.
Intensifying suburban Scarborough one lot at a time won't make it less autocentric. Enough intensification of lots will contribute to traffic chaos. On these forums, traffic concerns are NIMBY quackery.
There have been many single family conversions to multi-family in Toronto. It's no longer conceptual. There are some that did a good job. However, the majority resulted in overpriced cramped shoeboxes and none replaced the family home. It's not all additions. There's a subtraction involved and an important subtraction when the birthrate is at record lows.
Typically, any sort of irrational NIMBY concern gets dismissed in public consultation. Changes in response to public consultation almost always yields a better development. It's sad that these engaged community "NIMBYs" have often more insight on city planning than these forums. Here it's centred on number of people per square kilometre like more people per square kilometre will make a autocentric neighbourhood an urban walkable pleasantville and keeping up with Toronto and Vancouver on suburban skyscrapers
Threaded Mode