Author
|
Topic: Squeal like a piggy!
|
|
|
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292
|
posted 05 November 2001 04:38 PM
Actuall, Weston and St. Clair and the surrounding area are a very old part of the City of Toronto. Originally the Borough and then the City of York and since amalgamation, now incorporated into Toronto. It is by no means suburban.I grew up not very far from there and all my life it was a heavily industrialized area of Meat Packers including Swifts and Canada Packers. Likewise, I have little sympathy. Did the people who bought there not visit the area? I would not buy a house on a former industrial lot. What chemicals were used and what chemicals remain? And certainly they would have seen there is still a lot of heavy industry in the area. Right on the corner of St. Clair and Weston is a huge plant that used to house a meat packers. I do not know what is in there now. But it is still there with a nice cedar fence all around. But I do agree with one thing: The slaughterhouse was there first. Deal with it.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sherpafish
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1568
|
posted 05 November 2001 06:11 PM
The once little town of Langley, BC, where I did my um, schooling, was once the site of many Money's Mushrooms' growing operations. To grow mushrooms you heat up slabs covered with green swine/cow manure to around 20c and turn off all the lights. Needless to say this produced quite the stink, in more ways than one. When Langley started to expand, post Expo86, more and more neosub-urbanites caugt wind of the Money's operations. By '98 all but one of the barns was out of operation and relocated further up the Fraser Valley. The yuppies raised a bigger stink, politicaly. quote: The slaughterhouse was there first. Deal with it.
-Exactly how I felt, until I started checking out the effluant produced from 100 tonnes of well warmed cow/pig shit. Langley contains the headwaters of at least 6 salmon bearing streams - some of these streams' fish runs are permanently extinct due to agricultural run-off. The question is Yuppies or Mushrooms/Slaughterhouses; which ones stink the worst? Despite personal experiences, both Kurt Vonnegut and I would perfer the Slaughterhouse - but one must assess the costs.
From: intra-crainial razor dust | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560
|
posted 05 November 2001 07:46 PM
The weird thing about it to me is that the people just took the developer's word for it that the slaughterhouse would be moving, that their lease is up and then invested their life savings in those houses. If I knew that slaughterhouse was there and was going to make a big investment, wouldn't it be worth it to maybe go to the main office of the slaughterhouse and see whether they were really leaving?I know people don't expect to be lied to, but wow. A slaughterhouse. I mean, a SLAUGHTERHOUSE. I'd be thinking long and hard about that one if I knew it was there. Only thing is, in Toronto, you usually put your down payment down long before they even start digging up the land - they sell a lot of those condos before the first brick is laid. So it might not occur to the person when going through the model home (which probably isn't next door to the slaughterhouse) that there might be a problem with industrial neighbours. My big problem with this is they seem to be targetting the guy who owns the slaughterhouse, harassing HIM about it. I mean, he was there since the 1930's! I think they should stick with the pressure tactics on the developer, picketing the sidewalk outside their office, and handing out flyers to prospective buyers. If they stay just off the property, there's nothing the development people can do about it - it's legitimate protest.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490
|
posted 05 November 2001 11:38 PM
You know, when I was a kid I always thought mommies and daddies bought houses to live in, and that buying and selling a house was just so mommies and daddies could move and bring the kids with them.Imagine my surprise when I found out that some mommies and daddies buy houses just so they can get richer, as opposed to living in those houses. Fast forward to today. I've NEVER understood the whining and snivelling and carping that goes on and on and on about property value. You'd think that all the dorks that raise holy hell about property values would be GLAD when they drop, since it means lower property taxes if the city doesn't raise the mill rate. [ November 05, 2001: Message edited by: DrConway ]
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292
|
posted 05 November 2001 11:59 PM
Michelle, in your initial post, and in the article, it states the homes sold for between $250,000 and $300,000. That is quite a lot of money. In that price range, someone could purchase a house in an established neighbourhood and maybe even save some. Just doing a quick search of homes in Toronto west ranging in price between $200,000 and $300,000, I came up with 24 listings. Check out this one: quote: $209,900 Located in W01. This two storey, detached home has 3 bedroom(s), 2 bath(s). Rooms include a family room, dining room, master bedroom, 1 kitchen(s). Property located near: SOUTH OF BLOOR. Perly's Map: 14 E 45. Property #: LU4774
There is no shortage of homes for sale in Toronto.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
David Kyle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1530
|
posted 06 November 2001 04:54 PM
That happens more often than you think. We just went through a big stink out running a new mega-highway through a number of communities. All the home owners were angry to find out they'll be living close to the road. The only problem is that the road had been on the books for over 35 years. They built the communities with enough room to put in the road without needing to knock any homes down, move roads, etc. A few quick phone calls to City Hall and you'ld find this all out.
From: canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554
|
posted 06 November 2001 05:15 PM
My brother-in-law is an architect and my girlfriend is an interior designer. I am NOT going to own an identihouse. The dream is to find a nice plot of land and get them to design me a groovy home that'll be as free from the electrical grid as possible.Or maybe I'll buy a surplus nuclear missle silo in the US somewhere. Yeah! That'd be cool! Or maybe I'll get a decommissioned warship or submarine from the Canadian navy and turn it into one hell of a houseboat! Oh, the possibilities!
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
fourstringhero
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1744
|
posted 07 November 2001 02:54 PM
Reading through this thread, some responses seem to abide by the Not In My Backyard theory. "If they had done their research..." does not consider the larger issue here. Where does your food comes from? Underground? Factories in the ocean? From the sky? This may be a bit off track, but, for our meat-based soceity, abattoirs are necessary. It makes sense to keep them in urban areas where the highest population density resides. By no means am I condoning the practices of slaughterhouses or of our meat-based culture, but I am saying that as we are dependent on meat, for now, it doesn't make sense to me to marginalize owners of these factories. ONLY if we all commit to vegetarianism does this make sense to me. I know of people who live near King and Tecumseh in Toronto, a half a block from a slaughterhouse, and NEVER heard them complain. And, they ARE vegetarians. But I guess as they are not property owners, they are insignificant. You should have sympathy for the slaughterhouse owner, who, while putting food and sustenance on YOUR table, judging by this thread, is NOT welcome in your backyard. Where then will your food come from?
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554
|
posted 07 November 2001 03:49 PM
It actually is a tricky dilemma. On the one hand, pig farming can be freakishly bad for the environment. On the other hand, the homeowners are being a bunch of whiners, and aren't protesting on environmental grounds. Plus, we don't know what the conditions are like at that slaughterhouse. If it conforms to environmental regulations, then who am I to judge?It's a toughie. In the end, I'll side with the slaughterhouse. quote: I've NEVER understood the whining and snivelling and carping that goes on and on and on about property value.
I dunno, it would be nice to know that one could afford to buy a home of equivalent quality if one were forced to sell one's current home. When you spend that much money on something, you don't want its resale value going down the drain. For most people, it's not really about making money. It's about holding on to the money they already have, and keeping up with inflation. If property values drop, that means a homeowner will have to go into debt again if they ever decide to move. That ain't cool. [ November 07, 2001: Message edited by: Kneel before MediaBoy ]
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490
|
posted 07 November 2001 04:21 PM
And I guess those homeowners should call up the feds and whine for a couple hundred grand to cover the cost of reselling if they decide to move, just like corporations call up the feds and whine for corporate welfare.Look, some people make bad decisions and don't check shit out fully enough. Tough freakin' noogies. It's not my job to babysit them when they whine about how horrid it is that they'll have to sell at a loss. HELLO? Just like the Soviets figured out you can't run an economy where nobody makes a profit, you can't run an economy where nobody TAKES A LOSS.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214
|
posted 07 November 2001 06:19 PM
Wait a minute.If the developer deliberately mislead them, then surely there is some culpability on their part. Seems to me we are getting so used to lying that it has become an accepted business practice, particularly in real estate. I think the law has something to say about that. Something in the fraud parts. And, there is no reason for a factory to stink these days, it's all a matter of how much it will cost to put in the needed environmental controls. That having been said, there is also culpability on the municipality. I work in a large stamping plant, and predictably there is some noise associated with that. When the plant was built, it was on the outskirts of town, in the east end where all the zoning was heavy industrial.
Some bozos in planning decided to allow residential housing close by. In fact, now there is a new subdivision across Clarke Side Road, adjacent to the CN mainline. AND the city of London just passed an emergency plan to create serviced industrial land. I wonder where all the old land went? Gee, it went to developers who sold houses to people in industrial areas that are now complaining about the noise from the plant I work in.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554
|
posted 09 November 2001 04:49 PM
quote: Give me an inner city house any day. Its great being able to walk to work.
Agreed. Wholeheartedly. Hell, MORE than wholeheartedly, if that's possible. BUT OTOH, we are fortunate to live in healthy, vibrant cities. I wouldn't be singing the same tune if I was a resident of the Bronx, Brooklyn or Queens in the 1950s and the idiots in city government put a big-ass, unnecessary freeway right through my neighbourhood. Who wouldn't want to flee to the burbs in that kind of situation? If we want to prevent more people from fleeing the cities, we gotta make sure that the cities WORK.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560
|
posted 12 May 2007 03:57 PM
An update...So much for the slaughterhouse... quote: Residents near a west-end slaughterhouse that burned for hours were allowed to return to their homes yesterday.The news is less positive for workers at the plant, though, after a five-alarm blaze that officials say will force the demolition of New York Pork and Meat Exchange. The mammoth blaze began early Monday and kept fire crews busy through the day with repeated flare-ups. The sturdily designed building made the job more difficult, with firefighters having to break through metre-thick walls in some places. The fire was completely extinguished late Monday but the site, near the intersection of St. Clair Avenue and Runnymede Avenue, remains dangerous, slowing the investigation of the fire marshal.
I'm updating this thread because while apartment hunting recently, I looked at a townhouse that was RIGHT NEXT DOOR to this place. Needless to say, I didn't take it, for reasons I spelled out in the other thread. I was joking with a couple of rabble staff I was telling this to, that when one of them told me that the burnt down building was the slaughterhouse in this old dispute, that suddenly I had visions of the area residents, kind of like the residents of Whoville on Christmas Day, joining hands in a circle around the slaughterhouse as it burned down. Well, at least I might have been tempted had I been one of them.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|