09-11-2022, 03:01 PM
(09-11-2022, 12:41 PM)dtkmelissa Wrote:(09-10-2022, 01:22 AM)taylortbb Wrote: I agree with your general point on mid-rises and European-style density, but this line stuck out. As far as I can tell, any development of single-detached residential into denser forms faces fierce opposition regardless of density. Even projects to replace two detached houses on large lots with several townhomes get neighbourhoods up in arms, despite no increase in height. I think anything denser than a semi-detached will face fierce opposition unless it's on a major road or in the downtown core, which is a small enough subset of properties that we're left with towers.
I mean, 660 Belmont is a great example of this. The original proposal was 13 storeys, then 12, and the city offered several council meetings dedicated to discussing this proposal (with a result of a 10 storey building). That was a whole lot of pushback and outrage on what is not a very tall building in my mind.
The opposition to the Belmont project was frustrating. The city and residents of the neighbourhood all market and act like it's this vibrant, diverse, culturally unique area...as if it's a Kensington Market in Toronto or Mile End Montréal. They've branded it "Belmont Village" even. Yet what is it? A stroad, strip malls and an ocean of parking lots. It's a terrible area with nothing there to even draw people in. This project could have been a catalyst for a revival and evolution of the area - allowing it to actually become something you could dub Belmont Village.
I can't recall if it was approved yet or not. If it was, I hope it can at least help evolve this area even if the building has to be smaller (which I'm not even opposed to in this area). New residents and retail spaces are great. And most of all, a new building does wonders in terms of impacting people in non-tangible ways - by introducing changes to the space(s) they exist in on a day to day basis. It changes attitudes of people in positive ways. In fact, earlier today I was reading a great research paper on this subject titled A Review of Neuroaesthetics Researches Related to Urban Experience which explores how aesthetic and spatial changes to an urban area have drastic impacts on how individual people perceive an area. In other words, I don't think the NIMBYs really understand how complex things like simple architectural and urban changes impact their neighbourhoods and personal experiences in positive ways. They just oppose things but lack the intellect to really make a case as to why, which is why it tends to always boil down to "blah blah blah traffic, shadows, heritage".