Urban Planning

[ssiguy]

I read the article and describing the relationship as parasitic is a bit harsh.

Having small towns around a larger city enjoying their benefits without the cost is not a one-way street. London also enjoys all these same townsfolk coming to the city for shopping, restaurants, entertainment, schooling etc and the tax revenue and employment they create.

That said, there is a big difference between cooperating and subsidizing. If Arva wants London services, it should have to pay London prices for initial start-up civic fees and the same ongoing prices Londoner pay. Unless Arva does that, the response from City Hall should be a categoric NO.

[tyeman200]

I think it's time for Arva to be annexed with London.

Lambeth has been, and it's further away than Arva is from London.

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by tyeman200

I think it's time for Arva to be annexed with London.

Lambeth has been, and it's further away than Arva is from London.

If you're goona do an amalgamation you may as well annex as much as you can with one act. Maybe grab Nilestown and Kilworth while you're at it. Perhaps Komoka, Dorchester and Ilderton too.

[K85]

Lets take it all! Then St. Thomas, then Talbotville, then Port Stanley and Lucan! BWWWWWWYAAAAAAAAAA

https://youtu.be/l6i-gYRAwM0?t=34

Originally Posted by haljackey

If you're goona do an amalgamation you may as well annex as much as you can with one act. Maybe grab Nilestown and Kilworth while you're at it. Perhaps Komoka, Dorchester and Ilderton too.

[jammer139]

Sad news that city staff are recommending the closure of Thames Park pool.


https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/end-...l-city-staff-recommend-permanent-closing

[inimrepus]

Originally Posted by jammer139

Sad news that city staff are recommending the closure of Thames Park pool.

The old pool was there for ages without many if any issues. I'm curious what is different with the new one to have all these issues. They blame the river but it isn't like the river just appeared there.

[tyeman200]

Originally Posted by inimrepus

The old pool was there for ages without many if any issues. I'm curious what is different with the new one to have all these issues. They blame the river but it isn't like the river just appeared there.

Well it is the river, as that park is prone to flooding everytime we get a huge downpour. So flooding over years has caused the concrete to crack and break.

[Djeffery]

It's not like the park just started flooding since they spent many millions of dollars rebuilding that pool less than 15 years ago. Now the thing is garbage? At less than half the average life span of the prior pools that have occupied that site over the last 100 years?

A splash pad sounds like such a downgrade, but reality is that's about all that should be done there now. They can't seriously justify 20 million or whatever to rebuild that pool for barely 3 months of use. When this story came out a couple weeks ago, I was thinking "Why don't they build a dyke along the park from Wortley to Ridout like along a good chunk of the river around downtown" But that's just a huge chunk of cash, added to the cost of rebuilding the pool, to again only provide a seasonal use. They need to find a site in Old South and build an indoor pool for year round use. I've heard Farquharson Arena being set for closure for as long as I can remember. Maybe a new life as a community centre and pool is a worthwhile investment at that location. That was the first place that came to mind, also the Wortley Green, but I think there would be a big pushback on giving up that greenspace. Would be an interesting neighbourhood fight though.

[jammer139]

Yeah the old arena is due for redevelopment and replacing it with a new indoor pool, community centre facility that can be used year round would be a much better asset to old south. Maybe opportunity to partner with TVDSB and improve South SS and Tecumseh PS at same time. Something creative and innovative there that also addresses the parking issues would be a big win. I would expand the tennis courts and add pickel ball and basketball courts to the Thames site as well as lighting to allow play until 11pm on those summer nites. I would also put back a soccer pitch where the old diamonds used to be.

[jammer139]

Vacant properties which may be demolished by city soon.



https://london.ctvnews.ca/urban-decay-these-five-buildings-face-city-s-wrecking-ball-1.6344725




If only we could see the Landlord sell off his many vacant buildings downtown to developers who could renovate them into apartments and condos and bring some more residents into the downtown.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by jammer139

Vacant properties which may be demolished by city soon.



https://london.ctvnews.ca/urban-decay-these-five-buildings-face-city-s-wrecking-ball-1.6344725




If only we could see the Landlord sell off his many vacant buildings downtown to developers who could renovate them into apartments and condos and bring some more residents into the downtown.

Interesting nugget in that story is that the new owners of the Grey St properties want to develop the apartment building that was proposed on that site a few years ago.

[jammer139]

Province intros new rules to encourage more housing.


https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/prop...ario-cities-to-expand-faster-for-housing

[jammer139]

Yeah the Family Circle restaurant was recently sold next door. Hopefully a real developer is doing this land assembly with a plan to build a new tower. No reason not to go 24s or higher given it is on the future BRT. The name of the game is density density density on transit corridors and downtowns. New provincial policy guidelines encourage this and any municipal councils who don't support high density on transit corridors should be shown the exit door. OLT will overrule any opposition. Here's hoping we see a new zoning application proposal for this corner very soon.


The question is who is doing the land assembly?

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Interesting nugget in that story is that the new owners of the Grey St properties want to develop the apartment building that was proposed on that site a few years ago.

[Djeffery]

Just saw a post on a neighbourhood FB group that a developer has been buying up land in Byron. The person who posted lives on Griffth, on the leg to the east of Boler, south of Wayne Rd, and has had a developer make an offer on their property. They said the developer has bought 5 homes on Boler and has plans for townhouses. Between this and the apartment building at Boler and Base Line, the NIMBY crew is going to be kept busy.

[CanadianTalk]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Just saw a post on a neighbourhood FB group that a developer has been buying up land in Byron. The person who posted lives on Griffth, on the leg to the east of Boler, south of Wayne Rd, and has had a developer make an offer on their property. They said the developer has bought 5 homes on Boler and has plans for townhouses. Between this and the apartment building at Boler and Base Line, the NIMBY crew is going to be kept busy.

Looking forward to seeing the townhouse proposal.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but Boler and Byron Base Line are arterial roads in a growing city, and these are the exact places where we want to see these kinds of infills. Townhouses and low rises are great examples of gentle infill. Although change can be hard for residents, they need to remember and understand that cities are living entities that change over time. We need thousands of housing units in our city within the next decade, and we can't fulfill all of that by building out on farmland.

There have been a few contentious infill projects so far in front of our new council, and all of them have been approved by a large majority, which is good news.

[Djeffery]

Further posts on that thread seem to suggest the OP was targeted for purchase because back in the 90's, he bought a chunk of land from the house facing Boler right behind his. He said that piece is 66x100 feet and he has a pool built on it. Of the 5 houses facing Boler, there is one with a full yard, then the one backing on to this guy with the partial yard, then 3 more with full yards. So his piece of land is pretty enticing to them as it would give them a solid rectangle of land instead of his piece jutting into it. I suggested that if he doesn't sell that they will likely still build on the rest of the property and he will end up with a bunch of second floor townhouse bedroom windows looking right at his pool.

[CanadianTalk]

That's actually a pretty interesting scenario as I'm looking at the area on the city's online map now which shows the lot lines and satellite aerial view. I never realized how huge those lots are off of Boler lol, but I can definitely see how having that small piece (that's currently owned by the Griffith house) would be ideal. But if the Griffith property owner doesn't sell, I agree that I don't think that would be the deciding factor as to whether a townhouse project goes ahead, as it would be a relatively small piece of land compared to the assembled property as a whole.

The Byron FB group is private so I can't see, but did he mention if the developer is offering to buy just that small piece (so they would have just enough land to make the Boler lots a perfect rectangle) or his whole property? If the latter, I would take the $$ and run lol, especially if they are offering more money than what it is worth.

[Djeffery]

He didn't mention whether he was offered to split that piece off, just that he was approached to sell his property and he doesn't plan to. It could be that the developer might want to put an entrance to the development off Griffith as well, but I think that might raise the ire of the neighbourhood even more. More likely would be the developer buys the whole property, carves off what they need at the back and then sell the house and original lot, which would still fetch $800-900k based on recent sales in the neighbourhood. I know if I was the owner, I would just sell the whole thing. If I gave up a large chunk of my property, and had to start again with renovating a now much smaller backyard, building a new pool and knowing what was coming behind me, it just wouldn't feel like home anymore. Of course, how knows what the developer is offering as well.

[jammer139]

LFP article on the new provincial bill whose goal is to encourage more housing. Only time will tell if the changes will succeed in creating more housing.



https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/up-t...o-london-of-ontario-building-law-changes

[jammer139]

Interesting article on the office to housing conversion changes taking place in many cities.


https://apnews.com/article/cities-downto...9f69b74a133eddb?utm_source=pocket-newtab