Found a video about Montreal specifically and how it relates to density. Ultimately, towers are only necessary because many cities in North America lack vision when it comes to medium density building. This culture is changing, but people fighting on opposite ends of the density spectrum isn't good for anyone. Arguing Hamilton needs 50 storey towers, while others want nothing but suburbia (see Ancasterites fighting a 4 storey building) means we are arguing at polar opposite ends of the spectrum.
My arguments, (responding to HonestMaple) isn't that a city with different height towers can't be vibrant, it's that they are not a requirement to be vibrant, and in fact towers over a certain height go past the spectrum of human enjoyment. Maybe it's my social science background speaking, because maybe you personally don't mind being around tall towers, but there are numerous studies that show living amongst tall towers can be bad for human health, mentally, psychologically. It can lead to social isolation when compared to missing middle housing, and being in constant shade isn't good for health either.
Like the end of this video below says, I'm not against height, and towers, especially considering the housing crisis. I'm quite excited for the building at King and Caroline, and think that height makes sense there. I do think John and Wilson is a bit tall for the area, considering the neighbourhoods that will be cast in shade in perpetuity. I lived on John and the existing apartment blocks shaded our house that got very limited sunlight in the first place because our unit was on the first floor of three units.
I just don't think that height is a necessity for really anything, and having an obsession with how Hamilton looks from kilometers away is weird. Hamilton's downtown looks great even now from Sam Lawrence park, but when you come up close you can see the social issues, and pain people feel while living here. You can see the parking lots where beautiful buildings once stood. From a distance people can see shit, but I care what we see up close.
Obsession with density at all costs, I think is just as toxic as obsession with the white picket fence suburban dream. It's based on an all or nothing view of how things should be. Core Urban shows that on a property zoned for 12 storeys, they can be profitable with a 6 storey building, so this idea that only 50 storeys can be profitable is baloney frankly. A larger problem is parking minimums, inclusionary zoning, and ridiculous DCs that should be part of property taxes.
Edit: just wanted to add, this is my opinion, and I just think there are various options for attacking housing crisis. Please don't respond with anything insulting, it is beneath me to respond to insults. People here having gotten incredibly aggressive toward me for my dislike of height at all costs. If you can't engage in civil discussion, your anger is probably best suited somewhere else. I'm allowed to have an opinion that isn't the exact same as yours, and it's not a simple situation of "you're either with us or against us". Again, I support many of the towers being built, but I don't understand the distaste toward a "tabletop" skyline. I used the most extreme example of Paris, but there are many cities that have a pretty flat skyline that are great cities.
https://youtu.be/mYCAVmKzX10
Prev
Linear Mode
