HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > SSP: Local London > Buildings & Architecture, Urban Design & Heritage Issues

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2011, 1:59 AM
Snark Snark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by bolognium View Post
I just find it really frustrating that the people who complain about our downtown being an unwelcoming dump are the same people that immediately shoot down any plans for revitalization.
I deal with such people on a regular basis. They have some fairly common traits:

- Gross ignorance of how things actually work. The level of ignorance can be stupefying. (the Mayor is personally responsible for the day-to-day running of the City)

- An inability to comprehend the complexity and operating difficulty of large systems and organisations. (Put me in charge for a year and I'll fix that place good. How hard can it be?)

- A baseline assumption that everyone "in charge" is at best incompetent and at worst corrupt. (They're all a bunch of lazy, lying, crooks out to screw us)

- Not concerned for the larger good or long-term strategic thinking (I don't care, I'll be dead by then)

- Not concerned for/will not support anything that they do not perceive will bring them direct benefit (I won't use that, why should I be forced to pay for it?)

- Generally, are underachievers - and they blame "the system" for causing it (I could be better off if just those dammed politicians were all rounded up and thrown in jail where they belong!)

- A nostalgic pining for the past - when things "were good" (you know: when people were decent and things were run properly)

This has been labeled "Tim Horten's conservatism", as the caricature of such types is a bunch of recently retired blue collar fellows sitting around at the coffee shop and bitching how everything is terrible, the world is screwing them over, and if only things went back to the happy days of the '70's things would fix themselves. The general cause of their problems are the lax justice system, outlawing corporal punishment on kids, feminists, politicians, and liberals/commies.

A laughable example was a comment in the Freep from some outraged nutcase that described the Ontario Hydro debt retirement charge as a "McGuinty tax grab". In truth, the charge was not initiated by the current Liberal government, does not go to the provincial government's revenue, and lastly, must be paid - as people and organisations actually hold that debt are obliged to be paid back. But, hey, why let reality get in the way of a good finger-pointing rant by a "victim" towards their oppressor.

This is ironic that this error-riddled rant is coming from someone who likely for years past benefited from paying artificially low electric costs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2011, 2:01 AM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 21,622
^good post.
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2011, 2:38 AM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 13,964
Would be awesome to see London get rid of all that surface parking and get some density finally!
__________________
Alberta 2014 - 4.2 million | Calgary 2014 - 1.5 million | Edmonton 2014 - 1.4 million
Alberta 2024 - 5.2 million | Calgary 2024 - 2.0 million | Edmonton 2024 - 1.8 million

Fortis et liber
Strong & free
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2011, 12:25 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 21,622
I can't stand "Tim Hortons Conservativism". Old codgers and misinformed workies bitchin about the system and the lazy good for nothin young folk that never knew a hard day's work.
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2011, 12:04 AM
Snark Snark is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
....and the lazy good for nothin young folk that never knew a hard day's work.
And that's EXACTLY why we need larger prisons and chain gangs!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Oct 7, 2011, 5:55 PM
haljackey's Avatar
haljackey haljackey is online now
User Registered
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 1,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
who do you think reads the LFP? 60 year-olds that are certain downtown's glory days are behind us and never coming back.
Not to mention the LFP is owned by SUN Media.. the newscaster that decided not to endorse anyone for the provincial election because none were 'right' enough.

The quality and spin of the LFP articles (and comments) are getting worse and worse. I'm reading the thing less and less.

----

To relate to the topic, some people are outraged that Joe may do a tax increase to fund this vision. I just hate how people jump to conclusions so quickly... it's an option, but probably won't be considered due to Joe's freeze.
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Oct 9, 2011, 7:08 PM
Wharn's Avatar
Wharn Wharn is offline
Torontonian Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Ontar-i-o
Posts: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by haljackey View Post
The quality and spin of the LFP articles (and comments) are getting worse and worse. I'm reading the thing less and less.
If you want something that will expand your knowledge, read The Economist. If you want something that was written for a bunch of seventh graders with brain damage, pick up a copy of anything published by SUN Media or Torstar. This is the way it's been for a while.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
I can't stand "Tim Hortons Conservativism". Old codgers and misinformed workies bitchin about the system and the lazy good for nothin young folk that never knew a hard day's work.
I can't say I'm a fan of "Tim Hortons Conservatism", but the whole "lazy young folk" thing they're bitching about is very real and manifests itself in "Starbucks Liberalism". This is where a bunch of students sit around on their Macbooks, sipping Fair Trade coffee and whining about how the government doesn't grow huge and move to subsidize and regulate absolutely everything. They'll bitch about our current system and how "unfair" it is that philosophy majors aren't rewarded with the same salaries as dentists, and pine for the good ol' days of 1970s Trudeau deficits. Really, despite the fact that the two stereotypical groups hate each other, they have much in common
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2011, 9:45 PM
Stevo26 Stevo26 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by bolognium View Post
I really fucking hate reading the LFP comments section. You'd think the only people that live in London are 60 year-olds that are certain downtown's glory days are behind us and never coming back. Yeah, the Simpson's display window is gone and we have some panhandlers, get over it you damn wet blankets. Have some vision for Christ's sake. Is $2.50 a month really that steep of a price for downtown revitalization and new development?

I really hope city council sticks to their guns and doesn't get too discouraged by this onslaught of negative opinions.
I for one, do not object to being asked to pay an additional $30 annually on my taxes to see the downtown upgrade plan getting off the ground. $30.00 isn't much, and as you point out, it works out to about $2.50 per month - which is less than a one-way LTC fare is, for crying out loud. The benefits from revamping the downtown

For a while, I was against some elements of downtown revitalization, thinking that it was, in essence, just a cheap attempt to shore up the crumbling tax base in the downtown area. That is, I've tended to see the downtown core as somewhat of a lost cause, because, with the exception of a few buildings, it's a bit of a scruffy-looking area.

I'll admit that part of my attitude about downtown revitalization has a lot to do with the way the city handled the John Labatt Centre - essentially building a facility at taxpayer expense so that a private company could move into it and make a profit. Not that I'm against profit. I just have the feeling that taxpayers won't see much out of the JLC deal until the lease is almost at an end - in about 40 years from now. And at the end of it all, the city has to bear the costs of refurbishing the facility or demolishing.

Now that I've seen what City Hall really wants to do with respect to the core, I'm starting to reexamine my assumptions.

While the proposed levy is for all practical intents and purposes a tax hike, it might generate big dividends later in terms of economic activity, and provide a badly needed boost in civic pride. It will also help the city realize its dream of revitalizing the downtown core.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2011, 9:51 PM
Stevo26 Stevo26 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by bolognium View Post
I really fucking hate reading the LFP comments section. You'd think the only people that live in London are 60 year-olds that are certain downtown's glory days are behind us and never coming back. Yeah, the Simpson's display window is gone and we have some panhandlers, get over it you damn wet blankets. Have some vision for Christ's sake. Is $2.50 a month really that steep of a price for downtown revitalization and new development?

I really hope city council sticks to their guns and doesn't get too discouraged by this onslaught of negative opinions.
I for one, do not object to being asked to pay an additional $30 annually on my taxes to see the downtown upgrade plan getting off the ground. $30.00 isn't much, and as you point out, it works out to about $2.50 per month - which is less than a one-way LTC fare is, for crying out loud. The benefits from revamping the downtown

For a while, I was against some elements of downtown revitalization, thinking that it was, in essence, just a cheap attempt to shore up the crumbling tax base in the downtown area because City Hall basically dropped the ball on preventing that erosion from taking place in the first place. That is, I've tended to see the downtown core as somewhat of a lost cause, because, with the exception of a few buildings, it's a bit of a scruffy-looking area.

I'll admit that part of my attitude about downtown revitalization has a lot to do with the way the city handled the John Labatt Centre - essentially building a facility at taxpayer expense so that a private company could move into it and make a profit. Not that I'm against profit. I just have the feeling that taxpayers won't see much out of the JLC deal until the lease is almost at an end - in about 40 years from now. And at the end of it all, the city has to bear the costs of refurbishing the facility or demolishing it.

Now that I've seen what City Hall really wants to do with respect to the core, I'm starting to reexamine my assumptions.

While the proposed levy is for all practical intents and purposes a tax hike, it might generate big dividends later in terms of economic activity, and provide a badly needed boost in civic pride. It will also help the city realize its dream of revitalizing the downtown core.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2011, 12:44 AM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 21,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wharn View Post
If you want something that will expand your knowledge, read The Economist. If you want something that was written for a bunch of seventh graders with brain damage, pick up a copy of anything published by SUN Media or Torstar. This is the way it's been for a while.



I can't say I'm a fan of "Tim Hortons Conservatism", but the whole "lazy young folk" thing they're bitching about is very real and manifests itself in "Starbucks Liberalism". This is where a bunch of students sit around on their Macbooks, sipping Fair Trade coffee and whining about how the government doesn't grow huge and move to subsidize and regulate absolutely everything. They'll bitch about our current system and how "unfair" it is that philosophy majors aren't rewarded with the same salaries as dentists, and pine for the good ol' days of 1970s Trudeau deficits. Really, despite the fact that the two stereotypical groups hate each other, they have much in common

Except for the MacBooks, Fourbucks, and Fair Trade, you could be describing the youth of my days (80s/90s), and probably, most other ages of recent history. Classic generation gap.

15 year subscriber of the Economist here.
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2011, 12:46 AM
haljackey's Avatar
haljackey haljackey is online now
User Registered
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 1,803
As long as they don't spend the money on those stupid metal trees I'm for it. London's pretty much got 1 chance left to redeem itself, better make it count.
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Oct 11, 2011, 2:45 AM
S-Man S-Man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,556
Quote:
I can't say I'm a fan of "Tim Hortons Conservatism", but the whole "lazy young folk" thing they're bitching about is very real and manifests itself in "Starbucks Liberalism". This is where a bunch of students sit around on their Macbooks, sipping Fair Trade coffee and whining about how the government doesn't grow huge and move to subsidize and regulate absolutely everything. They'll bitch about our current system and how "unfair" it is that philosophy majors aren't rewarded with the same salaries as dentists, and pine for the good ol' days of 1970s Trudeau deficits. Really, despite the fact that the two stereotypical groups hate each other, they have much in common
Here in Ottawa - or anywhere else there are very loud, mostly retired public servants - the people making the NIMBY comments and throwing wrenches into every plan and project (because they don't support it/will never use it/want peace and quiet and low taxes) are somewhere in between. The well-off, Boomer pensioners/close to retirement people who feels their glory days (and the rest of the world's) was in the Trudeau-era '70's are the ones doing the delaying.
It's terrible here for that - a clash of the Tim Hortons Tories who write to the SUN but never form a protest groups and the ex-hippie Trudeauites who feel their special interest group speaks for everyone and takes the city to court over every little thing, like if a building is one storey too tall for the neighbourhood.
With a growing population approaching 1.3 million we're reducing bus service and raising fares (25% in five years) because the people who like to sit in their rapidly-appreciating homes and drive everywhere don't want THEIR tax dollars spent on a "useless" light rail system. or have density downtown or anywhere near it (because it will mean traffic on their urban street). Or have entertainment venues or sporting arenas, etc, etc, etc...

Good (but saddened) to see it's the same everywhere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2011, 10:57 PM
Stevo26 Stevo26 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by S-Man View Post
Here in Ottawa - or anywhere else there are very loud, mostly retired public servants - the people making the NIMBY comments and throwing wrenches into every plan and project (because they don't support it/will never use it/want peace and quiet and low taxes) are somewhere in between. The well-off, Boomer pensioners/close to retirement people who feels their glory days (and the rest of the world's) was in the Trudeau-era '70's are the ones doing the delaying.
It's terrible here for that - a clash of the Tim Hortons Tories who write to the SUN but never form a protest groups and the ex-hippie Trudeauites who feel their special interest group speaks for everyone and takes the city to court over every little thing, like if a building is one storey too tall for the neighbourhood.
With a growing population approaching 1.3 million we're reducing bus service and raising fares (25% in five years) because the people who like to sit in their rapidly-appreciating homes and drive everywhere don't want THEIR tax dollars spent on a "useless" light rail system. or have density downtown or anywhere near it (because it will mean traffic on their urban street). Or have entertainment venues or sporting arenas, etc, etc, etc...

Good (but saddened) to see it's the same everywhere.
Well, if it's any comfort, it seems to me that old men (and I'm not generalizing here) are a grumpy lot who like to bitch about everything. I sense that their grumpiness and oppositional behaviour has a lot to do with the fact that they have nothing really meaningful to do with their time.

I have an uncle in his mid-sixties who, despite the fact that he's still working full-time, fits the 'grumpy old man' mould well. He's very opinionated and will oppose anything you say because (a) he has to be right every time, and (b) just for the hell of it!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2011, 5:43 AM
Wharn's Avatar
Wharn Wharn is offline
Torontonian Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Ontar-i-o
Posts: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
Except for the MacBooks, Fourbucks, and Fair Trade, you could be describing the youth of my days (80s/90s), and probably, most other ages of recent history. Classic generation gap.
Do people maybe just become more conservative as the grow older? You say youth in "your day" behaved much the same way, but I don't see too many self-entitled washouts in their 30s. Logic dictates that some of them would still be around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S-Man View Post
Good (but saddened) to see it's the same everywhere.
I wouln't say it's the same here, we just have a similar set of problems. Feel free to comment or revise, but I believe this sums up London's issues: we have a completely apathetic productive class (includes white-collar and blue-collar people who actually do something valuable for a living) and then a relatively small but extremely vocal and counter-productive lower class, whose biggest concern is that a $45 property tax hike will compromise their ability to get a couple of 2-4's on Canada Day. They do all the bitching and whining. Since the productive class just wants their schools and roads at a reasonable price, they could care less and city council ends up scuttling a lot of worthwhile proposals.

Last edited by Wharn; Oct 16, 2011 at 6:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Oct 16, 2011, 1:35 PM
ForestryW's Avatar
ForestryW ForestryW is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kitchener, Ontario
Posts: 307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wharn View Post
...a relatively small but extremely vocal and counter-productive lower class, whose biggest concern is that a $45 property tax hike will compromise their ability to get a couple of 2-4's on Canada Day.
As someone who grew up in a lower class family in downtown London I can confirm that this is, indeed, our biggest concern.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wharn View Post
They do all the bitching and whining.
No worse than the white-Cadillac Escalade-driving self-entitled upper-middle class a**holes who oppose any tax hike as an invasion of individual rights.

People everywhere and of all income levels oppose tax increases for whatever reason. It's nothing new and definitely not restricted to London.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2011, 1:46 AM
Wharn's Avatar
Wharn Wharn is offline
Torontonian Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Ontar-i-o
Posts: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by van Hemessen View Post
No worse than the white-Cadillac Escalade-driving self-entitled upper-middle class a**holes who oppose any tax hike as an invasion of individual rights.
I agree, people who drive Escalades have awful taste in cars. If you're going to spend that kind of money, at least get a proper 4x4, like a Range Rover or a Toyota Land Cruiser. Not that American bling-bling rubbish.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2011, 2:15 AM
Highinthesky Highinthesky is offline
Beefeater
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Hey Steveo

I think your feelings about the JLC are misinformed or misguided as the whole point of the JLC project was to spur revitalization of a part of DT that only 7 or 8 short years ago was a place you didn't want to walk at night. It has been a huge success.

Building the JLC wasn't about building a cash cow for the city in the form of the JLC. It was about turning a part of the core into a cash cow in terms of assessment base. If at the end of the lifespan of the JLC the city takes a small loss or breaks even it will still be miles ahead in terms of the millions in new property tax revenues from the massive increases in assessment base in that area. The latest report on the DT core from city planners says that the assessment base in the core has increased 15% since 2006, you will find much of that came from the JLC area.

More city driven initiatives like the JLC should be encouraged DT.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2011, 3:28 PM
Wharn's Avatar
Wharn Wharn is offline
Torontonian Refugee
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Ontar-i-o
Posts: 954
Ran across this in Western's Gazette earlier on today. Normally the paper doesn't have anything terribly interesting or relevant to this forum, but this article makes some interesting points: http://www.westerngazette.ca/2011/10...ng-to-pay-off/

London's downtown was really in a downward spiral during the mid 1990s, but ever since revitalization efforts started in 2002 (which included the construction of the JLC), we've seen population and property values increase dramatically. The JLC seems to have also produced some positive externalities by enticing more desirable businesses to open up downtown. Now, as you can imagine, not everything is rainbows and cookies... everyone admits that Dundas Street is still a problem. In typical Gazette fashion, though, they don't seem to mention what the problem specifically is, they just seem to broadly state "yeah Dundas is shit, we know" without pointing fingers. What are your thoughts?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2011, 4:46 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Liver & Onions
Posts: 21,622
Indeed. King street around the JLC has become the replacement for Dundas street, which once was the showcase shopping avenue. Some good bones, but some real sores as well.
__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -Donald Rumsfeld
Didn't you notice on the plane when you started talking, eventually I started reading the vomit bag?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2011, 5:52 PM
bolognium's Avatar
bolognium bolognium is offline
bro
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London, ON
Posts: 381
I don't really see King as a replacement for Dundas. Right now King's mostly fancy restaurants and massive parking lots. Dundas has three times as many storefronts leaving a lot more room for vacancies and payday-blight. If anything I'd say Richmond has become the new "shopping avenue." However, I definitely agree that King Street is becoming a new destination in itself.

I've lived downtown for almost 6 months and I haven't spent much time visiting stores on King. With the exception of getting a burger from The Works and visiting the Market twice I wouldn't notice if King Street ceased to exist.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > SSP: Local London > Buildings & Architecture, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.