Comment 68323

By Mahesh_P_Butani (registered) - website | Posted August 21, 2011 at 17:06:30

Jason, respectfully - you will agree that the premise: Hamilton needs to aim higher "literally" is entirely based on loose subjective thinking.

In the spirit of healthy discussions, when substantive information is presented here to help readers get a better grasp of "density" in relation to height of buildings - your response is simply to ignore that totally, and get back to your original subjective thinking which is based on superficial comparisons of cities based on personal likes or dislikes.

Did Vancouver look to Toronto for becoming Vancouver? Did Paris look to London or New York for becoming Paris?

You will appreciate that many people in Hamilton look to alternative news sources to get information on city building issues. When such sources fail to discuss all sides of an issue - patently fallacious impressions are left in readers minds.

This gets more complicated when such loose thinking turns into a mob which lashes out by irrational down/low voting of anyone presenting different views - which then begins to morph into lobbying groups to swarm councillors & city staff to impact city policies.

I would like to see you take a moment and present your views more directly on: Urban Density Misconceptions - only one among many documents that speaks logically on the same issue - which is that there are many ways to acheive density, and that high-rise is just one of them.

In light of this would you still be inclined to put things loosely like: "...heck... lets...jazz up the skyline..." -- Is this what you truly think Hamilton's real problems are? Does this kind of thinking in anyway factor in the geographical and economic realities of Hamilton? or even the economics of the development industry?

I realize that in face of deeper scrutiny of issues - the normal reaction here is to react or say things like: "but this just a blog and not an academic or technical forum for developing real ideas and policies for Hamilton's future" -- and I totally respect that if that is so -- but then why go through the pains of posturing that this forum is some logic driven, evidence based exercise in community building -- when YouTube has been far more successful without such pretenses, and which is after all the ultimate in 'stream of consciousness' thinking. YouTube allows loose and in-depth thinking to coexist - which is why it is far more powerful in affecting social change thru its Meme generating ability than any socially oriented blogs have ever been.

I think the issue of 'density' is one of the most critical issues facing Hamilton. Our city's growth and economy is dependent on how smartly we are able to render the concept of density into meaningful built-form. This is by no means a topic that can be handled in a cavalier manner by reducing it to issues of likes, dislikes or fashion statements. To make use of a pulpit at ones disposal to propagate such dubious thinking is just not right.

Continuing to compare Hamilton to Vancouver is one of the most mindless exercises undertaken, for it just add more confusion in the minds of readers who look up to this forum for tempered insights.

"I just discovered what Hamilton's real problem is: It is me!"

T-shirts with this line, worn by all in our city for a few months may help us acknowledge Hamilton's 'real' problem... and hopefully open up our minds to developing more qualified solutions.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds