4 ms·
Am I the only one who thought 6,000 new homes was an extremely low number? Maybe. Here in Toronto, we've had a rough average of 35,000 new homes each year. I'm
by lstamour 13y ago
Am I the only one who thought 6,000 new homes was an extremely low number?
Maybe. Here in Toronto, we've had a rough average of 35,000 new homes each year. I'm used to seeing new buildings and cranes all over town. It's not a boom town, but I've yet to hear of a shortage either...
And Toronto's population is roughly 3.1x that of San Francisco, but it's held steady for roughly the last decade at least. 35/6 is 5.8x less, and given the population growth in SF, the number of new builds should be at least double; 12k perhaps.
Equally funny, Toronto also had a freeway revolt and succeeded. So we have a relatively livable downtown, plus growth. Go figure. Some corridors in Toronto are nothing but skyscrapers. Height restrictions do exist, but are raised on a case-by-case basis (e.g. public art, parks can help negotiate). Even areas that fought expressways, while mostly single-dwelling, have allowed high rises along nearby major streets.
That said, we're still trying to make plans to destroy the Gardiner Expressway, our Embarcadero it seems.
- akgerber 13y agoY'all got this to balance out NIMBYs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Municipal_Board http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Municipal_Board Do you know what kinds of stories you never hear in California: "the OMB, against the City's wishes, approved development of a condominium/townhouse complex near a low-density residential area immediately west of North York Centre."