Comment 49001

By Undustrial (registered) - website | Posted October 07, 2010 at 19:06:27

While I support intensification, that doesn't mean I support every project that intensifies neighbourhoods. I live a number of blocks away and can tell ya that gentrification is a real concern here. I'd love to see more people, and more money being spent at neighbourhood establishments, but if it means existing residents and establishments being displaced to make way for a better "quality" of clients. I had friends who lived in Vancouver and were evicted 3 times in one year for new demolitions and new condo projects.

Having worked for one infamous local condo (I quit promptly for gross safety violations), and knowing many who live in them (including the Mississagua towers), can tell you it's often a big racket. Building frequently halts when money runs out and investors flee - leaving derelict hulks like the Howard Johnson or the Dundurn St. Loffts. Residents are taken for a ride, financially, and often physically (I've known millionaires who ended up couch surfing for the better part of a year when they sold their homes and their condos just weren't ready yet. The construction quality is often very poor (ala Vancouver's "leaky condo" crisis). And as for parking, keep in mind that very few people around here have driveways, to the point where auto work is often done curbside. It is an issue, and it does have to be brought up. If I lived next door, I'd be worried too.

What we need is a process where neighbours can constructively raise concerns and can find constructive solutions with builders, rather than a convoluted building code/zoning process which serves neither group. The last thing we need is an intensification binge like what happened to Durand in past decades, replacing century-old homes with drab, concrete towers.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds