Well then why not get started in the suburbs where this would presumably be a lot easier to accomplish since there's no one living there yet to object? Let's start seeing the developers roll out master-designed high-quality dense communities to rival the existing ones in inner areas. But they don't.
You see the problem? In effect you're demanding that places like Westboro and the Glebe take on extra density so as to allow the suburbs to carry on more or less as is. If more density is good in the older areas, then it should be in the newer ones too, if not more so. And really, it's not as if today's Westboro is exactly lacking in density, either. Sure, it can have more, but it doesn't need to be in the form of 8, 10 and 12 storey buildings on Richmond Rd, either.
The developers' desire for more density in inner areas has nothing whatsoever to do with what's good for the city as a whole; it has only to do with profitability. For that they want very high density in inner areas and very low density in outer areas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radster
No, you got it wrong. I understand where you and Dado are coming from, but the reality is that the word 'village', when local residents in Westoboro use the term, is not just simple nomenclature. It is actually NIMBYism at its best!
|
Ya, that's got to be it. I've been using it most of my life but now you tell me that all this time it's essentially been some cunning preparation for a time in the then-distant future when we would have to call upon the forces of Westboroian NIMBYism as embodied by the term 'village'.
And what do you do about those who support the project, or support it generally, and still use the term 'village'?
Face it, it's not NIMBYism, it's just the way it's always been.
Quote:
|
At this point, with condos poppin up left right and center, old style shops being replaced with new style shops, and more foot and car traffic in the oh so dear 'village', they are freakin out!!!
|
You want to see freaking out? Go buy a few properties on a street in Nepean, say Meadowlands between Merivale and Woodroffe, and propose to put in a 12 storey building. Or just propose a 4-5 storey building. Either way I doubt you'd get only half of the audience that shows up at an open house on the project to cheer on a speaker who denounces the height, which is what happened in Westboro (fwiw, I *didn't* cheer).
It is rather amusing how the residents of Westboro take quite a bit of abuse on this forum for alleged NIMBYism when residents here have been far more accepting of infill than you would tend to find in most of the city. We've got social housing infill around the Churchill/Scott intersection built as mid-rise that went in with not a lot of fuss sometime in the late 80s or early 90s. Now try to pull that off most anywhere else. If anything, Westboro residents probably have grounds to complain that their relatively accepting attitude is being constantly taken advantage of by developers who fear even worse elsewhere.
Quote:
|
If it was simple nomenclature then the word 'village' would be written with an upper case V. But as we can see in Ken Gray's recent article plus the letter to the editor which I quoted again below, village is written in lower case, implying that this NIMBY is bitter that he ain't livin in a village no more! BOOOO HOOOO maybe he should move out to Manotick or Smiths Falls :
|
Umm, ok.
In English, words are generally only capitalized if they are proper nouns, so capitalization of 'village' is going to depend on the context. We have 'Westboro Village' but if when I say I'm going there I would write "I'm going to the village". I can't capitalize that because that would imply it's an incorporated body and I'm going to its HQ or something (compare city and City - the former refers to the urban area, the latter to the incorporated body that governs it). Another example: I can write "I'm went to Carlingwood Mall" or "I went to the mall" but not "I went to the Mall" (other than the ones in London or Washington, of course). Or another example in Westboro: "I'm going to Westboro Beach" or "I'm going to the beach" but never "I'm going to the Beach".
Besides being an exercise in futility to change an entire population's long-running naming practices, I'm actually trying to figure out what you would have us change to. I live in Westboro but how would I refer to the main street part of it if not by "the village"? "I'm going to downtown Westboro"? Well besides sounding daft, it doesn't allow for cutting out the "Westboro" part when talking with other residents since it's open to confusion with downtown Ottawa (btw, hasn't Ottawa grown up enough that we should be using "city centre"?). People east of Island Park can use "Wellington" or "Wellington Street" (or maybe "the street", but I don't live there so I don't know) but here in Westboro we can't do that with 'Richmond' because Richmond is a place in its own right. And no one who lives in Westboro is going to say that they are going to "Westboro Village" in common speech, because, well, we're already in Westboro. Maybe you want us to say "I'm going to the outdoor equipment shopping district."
Prev
Linear Mode
