Posts: 476
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation:
17
The idea that we don't have enough people to fill these developments is laughable. We have the fewest houses per capita in the G7 and would need to build I think ~4 million homes instantly to be brought up to the G7 average. Not to mention Canada is setting its most ambitious immigration targets yet.
Until our housing prices start dropping below the rate of inflation there is no overbuilding. Simply put Canada could not build enough homes right now if they tried. Not only are we so low on houses per capita, we are falling too, so our current development pace is even failing to keep pace with immigration. Something needs to be done asap. I know there's an insane construction boom in this country but there needs to be even more of one.
Posts: 2,093
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
60
(07-27-2021, 07:22 PM)Bjays93 Wrote: The idea that we don't have enough people to fill these developments is laughable. We have the fewest houses per capita in the G7 and would need to build I think ~4 million homes instantly to be brought up to the G7 average. Not to mention Canada is setting its most ambitious immigration targets yet.
Until our housing prices start dropping below the rate of inflation there is no overbuilding. Simply put Canada could not build enough homes right now if they tried. Not only are we so low on houses per capita, we are falling too, so our current development pace is even failing to keep pace with immigration. Something needs to be done asap. I know there's an insane construction boom in this country but there needs to be even more of one.
Ha NZ has this problem even more than Canada but yes. More housing (condos, townhouses, houses, everything) please, preferably high-density.
Posts: 449
Threads: 11
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation:
71
Posts: 6,693
Threads: 38
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
118
It would be more surprising if a proposal to remove hundreds of trees did not give rise to concerns.
Posts: 1,593
Threads: 28
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation:
166
Posts: 476
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation:
17
(08-11-2021, 11:42 PM)Acitta Wrote: Council sends developer back to the drawing board asking for less density and more green space I'm fine with this. Hopefully they find a solution that doesn't involve clear cutting the whole site and also doesnt involve 5 identical buildings
Posts: 4,308
Threads: 65
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation:
250
I doubt they'll change the design of the buildings, though they may decide to scale the project back and only build 4 in order to preserve the greenspace. That, or they'll likely just propose including a park.
Posts: 10,840
Threads: 67
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation:
392
(08-12-2021, 12:25 PM)ac3r Wrote: I doubt they'll change the design of the buildings, though they may decide to scale the project back and only build 4 in order to preserve the greenspace. That, or they'll likely just propose including a park.
They could do some height variations -- maybe four buildings at 13, 15, 17, 15 storeys, or something like that -- without changing the basic design. One fewer tower would allow for more greenspace. And four towers with different heights would make it more attractive.
Posts: 1,048
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation:
238
https://www.therecord.com/local-cambridg...-vote.html
As usual, our press only exists to support the loudest status quo voices. What’s the point of government if it’s paralyzed in and out of election season? We only hear from the people who sign a petition against, where is the petition for the project? Who speaks for future residents?
Annoyance: Yet again, these articles always mention the trees being taken down for this project but nobody knows how many trees were taken down for the subdivision on top of the hill 70 years ago - the same one all these NIMBYs are appearing from.
local cambridge weirdo
Posts: 4,308
Threads: 65
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation:
250
(09-21-2022, 10:22 AM)bravado Wrote: As usual, our press only exists to support the loudest status quo voices. What’s the point of government if it’s paralyzed in and out of election season? We only hear from the people who sign a petition against, where is the petition for the project? Who speaks for future residents?
Nobody, basically. Nobody cares enough. We are (this website) are probably one of the few communities that exist that are very pro-development. There might be some IRL groups too but without a loud voice.
Not to mention when it comes to the media - ignoring the fact that The Record is extremely anti-development and conservative - they know pro-development content isn't going to really get the clicks and reactions from people so you never really see that stuff get published. They have no problem pumping out article after article and op-ed after op-ed about NIMBY BANANA stuff since it'll get a rise out of people. Probably doesn't help that at this point, their readership is likely just made up of people who already agree with this sentiment as well, so if they started writing pro-development content then they'd get angry letters and replies on social media.
Posts: 2,093
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
60
I'd say that there has been a bunch of handwringing in the media about housing affordability and the start of a shift in society about more building more housing.
Posts: 1,048
Threads: 18
Joined: Aug 2021
Reputation:
238
09-26-2022, 10:57 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-26-2022, 10:57 PM by bravado.)
https://www.cambridgetoday.ca/local-news...il-5851105
Quote:A proposal to bring five-15 storey condo towers, and 40 two-storey townhouses to the sloping green space between Water Street South and Highman Avenue is returning to the council horseshoe Tuesday, this time with a full recommendation from planning staff.
I am looking forward to city council ignoring the recommendation of planning staff and rejecting 991 units in a housing crisis to appease fewer than 991 homeowners up on a hill.
local cambridge weirdo
Posts: 843
Threads: 5
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
48
Approved
https://kitchener.citynews.ca/local-news...es-5886289
Quote:The projects coming to 193 Water St. South and 255 King St. East, will see the construction of a combined 1,600 residential units the city says will "contribute to the revitalization" of the cores and provide homes for some of the 70,000 new residents expected to call Cambridge home over the next 30 years.
Posts: 476
Threads: 1
Joined: Sep 2019
Reputation:
17
I'm a little disappointed this was approved in it's current iteration. This is a great site for density but I would've liked to see some significant reworks here.
I guess the bright side is Cambridge city council is being a little less hesitant when it comes to highrise developments. Would've much rather seen the shade street proposal approved over this though.
Posts: 4,308
Threads: 65
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation:
250
Is Cambridge city council all right? They usually don't move this fast haha.
|
