[Tharkun]

Limiting high rise sounds like a good thing. Especially in places reasonably far from the equator. It's nice being able to get sunlight at the street level!

I don't think very tall buildings are the answer. More and better communal services and smaller more efficient properties. I think that would go a fair way.

[ppereira]

This is NIMBYism at its finest. Those who immigrated to Toronto first own prime real estate near commercial centres. New working families have to move out and commute long distances so that retired folk living in Toronto houses can enjoy their land appreciation and sunshine.

[cmurf]

It happens everywhere it seems, even in small resort towns, their success does not apply to everyone. If you have money, you can buy in. If you don't, you live in the next town, and pay for your own bus to get to work.

Back in the day, America, and even in Britain, housed their servant class.

Today, sure the servant class is "free" to the degree they're not literally called servants, but I think we're doing things worse when it comes to housing. This servant class is priced out of the employer's neighborhood market to be sure, but often all surrounding neighborhoods, and increasingly even the town, that their employer resides in. They're effectively exported at the end of their service day, and imported when needed again the next. I think it's disgusting.

[vitd]

There are ways to make it better. For example, when driving through Manhattan, you feel like you're in a canyon. In downtown Chicago, you don't get that same feeling because they have rules that buildings have to be so many feet from the street, and after a certain height must be set in even more. It's a real noticeable difference from cities that don't have such regulations, and it really makes the city feel much more sunny, friendly, and alive. I often felt like a troll walking through Manhattan.