5 ms·

I know the average Torontonian wasn't into this, but I live nearby and was really excited about what it could have been, even though it was fraught with misstep

I know the average Torontonian wasn't into this, but I live nearby and was really excited about what it could have been, even though it was fraught with missteps. This area is a concrete wasteland–just car-parks and abandoned lots–that's now going to be portioned off to more giant, glass condo buildings, and while Sidewalk's proposal had problems, it was focused on building something very different, community-oriented, without prioritizing roads. Sidewalk really pushed the technology angle way too hard, and it was a clear overstep– most of it wasn't necessary for any sort of quality of life improvements, but many of the ideas like wooden 'skyscrapers' and de-prioritizing roads were exciting, now lost.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
You can still advocate for such urban redevelopment and community planning without Big Tech behind it.
- bbeekley 6y ago
  Local HOAs and similar have loud voices against these kind of projects. It might take another big voice (like Sidewalk Labs) to counter. I've tried calling my local reps to support walkable community projects and have been told, nearly verbatim, that if the HOA doesn't like it, they won't be voting for it. Then when big tech offices started moving in, the redevelopment projects finally started too.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- leoh 6y ago
  Sure, but it would have been really interesting to see what Sidewalk could have done here, especially given that it was a blighted area.
- tyre 6y ago
  You can but change is measured in decades and even then often doesn't happen. Starting "fresh" with a single leading implementer is really how it needs to be done. Take San Francisco. There's the planning board, the planning department, environmental lawsuits, HOAs, abusing "historic landmarks" designations, political showmanship, developers, affordable housing, community meetings, unions, community groups (the cycling people are borderline militant) etc. etc. All of those can bring any change to its knees. And they have, repeatedly. There are good parts of this process and people shouldn't not have input, but I might not oppose a dictator coming in for two years and just having at it.
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    San Francisco has changed immensely in just the last decade. It may not be noticeable if you live there because you only see the incremental day by day changes, but as someone who only sporadically visits the Bay Area: it's nothing like it was in 2010. It's significantly more built up (and out), more skyscrapers, more apartments, more condos, more everything.
    - asdff 6y ago
      Housing prices would tell you there is actually less of everything, relatively. Demand has surged, sufficient supply has yet to be constructed, queue housing crisis. Not enough housing is being built in California's cities.
      - gamblor956 6y ago
        Less of everything on a relative basis, but more of everything on an absolute basis. It's a game of moving goal posts.
      - nickv 6y ago
        14 new residential high rises were built in SoMA in the past 5 years. 3 more are going up as we speak and opening in the next few months. That's a LOT of residential construction in a very short amount of time. (Mind you that's just a 15 block area in East Cut/SoMA - I'm not even talking about ALL of Mission Bay which didn't exist 10 years ago or the Van Ness corridor or Mid-Market.) The problem here is we only started building about 10 years ago (with One Rincon being the first major new building in a long time) and the rest of the Bay Area (for example, Brisbane notoriously) is nowhere near doing its fair share of building.
- vkou 6y ago
  You can, but its difficult without an 800-pound gorilla on your team.
- notatoad 6y ago
  you can, but big tech had big tech money. Unless you've got a few billion to throw away you're going to have a hard time convincing any developers to build something other than the most economically productive building. and for that location, that's a big glass condo building that looks like every other big glass condo building and doesn't benefit anybody other than the people who can afford to live in big glass condo buildings.
52-6F-62 6y ago
I was intrigued until they started getting into wanting legal jurisdiction over the region. Even beyond the assumed privacy implications that was the real hard line for me. They did back down off of that as far as I'm aware. I hope we can see the experimentation with wooden skyscrapers, etc, though.
ramshorns 6y ago
> that's now going to be portioned off to more giant, glass condo buildings I hope it's something a bit different. Looks like Waterfront Toronto will turn back to the community for new ideas for Quayside. https://waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/portal/waterfront/Home/waterfronthome/newsroom/newsarchive/news/2020/may/statement+from+waterfront+toronto+board+chair%2C+stephen+diamond+on+the+quayside+project https://waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/portal/waterfront/Home/water...
spideymans 6y ago
> Sidewalk really pushed the technology angle way too hard, and it was a clear overstep– most of it wasn't necessary for any sort of quality of life improvements, but many of the ideas like wooden 'skyscrapers' and de-prioritizing roads were exciting, now lost. These ideas are not lost. The City of Toronto has already approved several wooden “skyscrapers”. This idea wasn’t unique to Google by any stretch of the imagination. De-prioritizing roads also was not unique to this Google development. In fact, just walking distance from Google’s smart-city proposal are two significantly larger developments (Portland’s and Unilever) that lean heavily on the shared streets/woonerf concept.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

You can still advocate for such urban redevelopment and community planning without Big Tech behind it.

bbeekley 6y ago
Local HOAs and similar have loud voices against these kind of projects. It might take another big voice (like Sidewalk Labs) to counter. I've tried calling my local reps to support walkable community projects and have been told, nearly verbatim, that if the HOA doesn't like it, they won't be voting for it. Then when big tech offices started moving in, the redevelopment projects finally started too.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
leoh 6y ago
Sure, but it would have been really interesting to see what Sidewalk could have done here, especially given that it was a blighted area.
tyre 6y ago
You can but change is measured in decades and even then often doesn't happen. Starting "fresh" with a single leading implementer is really how it needs to be done. Take San Francisco. There's the planning board, the planning department, environmental lawsuits, HOAs, abusing "historic landmarks" designations, political showmanship, developers, affordable housing, community meetings, unions, community groups (the cycling people are borderline militant) etc. etc. All of those can bring any change to its knees. And they have, repeatedly. There are good parts of this process and people shouldn't not have input, but I might not oppose a dictator coming in for two years and just having at it.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  San Francisco has changed immensely in just the last decade. It may not be noticeable if you live there because you only see the incremental day by day changes, but as someone who only sporadically visits the Bay Area: it's nothing like it was in 2010. It's significantly more built up (and out), more skyscrapers, more apartments, more condos, more everything.
  - asdff 6y ago
    Housing prices would tell you there is actually less of everything, relatively. Demand has surged, sufficient supply has yet to be constructed, queue housing crisis. Not enough housing is being built in California's cities.
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      Less of everything on a relative basis, but more of everything on an absolute basis. It's a game of moving goal posts.
    - nickv 6y ago
      14 new residential high rises were built in SoMA in the past 5 years. 3 more are going up as we speak and opening in the next few months. That's a LOT of residential construction in a very short amount of time. (Mind you that's just a 15 block area in East Cut/SoMA - I'm not even talking about ALL of Mission Bay which didn't exist 10 years ago or the Van Ness corridor or Mid-Market.) The problem here is we only started building about 10 years ago (with One Rincon being the first major new building in a long time) and the rest of the Bay Area (for example, Brisbane notoriously) is nowhere near doing its fair share of building.
vkou 6y ago
You can, but its difficult without an 800-pound gorilla on your team.
notatoad 6y ago
you can, but big tech had big tech money. Unless you've got a few billion to throw away you're going to have a hard time convincing any developers to build something other than the most economically productive building. and for that location, that's a big glass condo building that looks like every other big glass condo building and doesn't benefit anybody other than the people who can afford to live in big glass condo buildings.

52-6F-62 6y ago

I was intrigued until they started getting into wanting legal jurisdiction over the region. Even beyond the assumed privacy implications that was the real hard line for me. They did back down off of that as far as I'm aware. I hope we can see the experimentation with wooden skyscrapers, etc, though.

ramshorns 6y ago

> that's now going to be portioned off to more giant, glass condo buildings I hope it's something a bit different. Looks like Waterfront Toronto will turn back to the community for new ideas for Quayside. https://waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/portal/waterfront/Home/waterfronthome/newsroom/newsarchive/news/2020/may/statement+from+waterfront+toronto+board+chair%2C+stephen+diamond+on+the+quayside+project https://waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/portal/waterfront/Home/water...

spideymans 6y ago

> Sidewalk really pushed the technology angle way too hard, and it was a clear overstep– most of it wasn't necessary for any sort of quality of life improvements, but many of the ideas like wooden 'skyscrapers' and de-prioritizing roads were exciting, now lost. These ideas are not lost. The City of Toronto has already approved several wooden “skyscrapers”. This idea wasn’t unique to Google by any stretch of the imagination. De-prioritizing roads also was not unique to this Google development. In fact, just walking distance from Google’s smart-city proposal are two significantly larger developments (Portland’s and Unilever) that lean heavily on the shared streets/woonerf concept.