News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 4.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 12K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 2.1K     0 

Jasonzed

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 13, 2010
Messages
7,785
Reaction score
12,347
IMG_20200919_1024516.jpg
IMG_20200919_1025037.jpg
DJI_0715.JPG
DJI_0714.JPG
 

marcus_a_j

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,213
Reaction score
1,314
I am used to addresses with odd numbers being on the south side of east-west road (as they are in Toronto) that I thought this was the site of the Small Arms Inspection Building. Glad it's not. Building massing and height are appropriate for this location. South-facing units will have nice views of the park (and Lake Ontario and the sewage treatment plant).

As a side note, does anyone know what these wooden walls are for? https://www.google.com/maps/@43.581...4!1samw1_OhvKyUmc8rXAAJEoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 . My initial thought is they were used for munitions testing for the SAIB.
 

drum118

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
17,178
Reaction score
13,251
City:
Toronto
Too tall is laughable and continue we will accept only 4-6 storey buildings on a major transit corridor.

May 10, 2021

4.7 RECOMMENDATION REPORT (WARD 1)
Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning applications to permit an 8 to 15 storey condominium apartment building with ground floor commercial space 1381 Lakeshore Road East, northeast corner of Lakeshore Road East and Dixie Road Owner: City Park (Lakeshore) Inc.

File: OZ 20/018 W1 David Ferro, MCIP, RPP, Development Planner, provided an overview of staff's recommendation to refuse the applications for Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning. In response to Councillor Starr's inquiry, Chris Rouse, Director, Development and Design advised that there has been discussions with the applicant with respect to potential settlement, and that staff would report to Council should a settlement be considered.

Mr. Rouse further advised that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) has moved away from conducting mediations and only conducting hearings. Councillor Ras commented that the application does not meet policies and tests for the Lakeview Local Area Plan and further noted that the proposal is too big and no value added to the community. In response to Councillor Starr's inquiry regarding opportunities to resolve this matter, Leo Longo, Partner, Aird & Berlis LLP, spoke with respect to the definition and intent of infill with tall storey buildings and provided examples of permitted developments.

Mr. Longo noted that the applicant has presented to the community and has listened to their concerns. Mr. Longo explained the position and reason for the applicant to take the Planning and Development Committee 2020/05/10 10 proposal to the LPAT, and further explained that the applicant is committed to working with staff and Council to proceed through the LPAT process to resolve this matter, and is looking forward to that opportunity.

The following persons spoke:

1. Deborah Goss, Lakeview Rate Payers Association, spoke in support of staff's recommendation to refuse the application and defend the position at the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, noting that high rise buildings should not be built to meet intensification targets.

2. Jonathan Giggs, Resident, spoke in support of the staff's recommendation to refuse the application noting that the proposal goes beyond what is acceptable for the community. Councillor Dasko spoke in opposition of the application and agrees with staff's recommendation to refuse the application and take a position at the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. Councillor Dasko spoke to the opportunities to continue with good planning and respect local areas and Official Plans.

RECOMMENDATION PDC-0033-2021 Moved By Councillor S. Dasko

1. That City Council direct Legal Services, representatives from the appropriate City Departments and any necessary consultants to attend the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing on the subject applications under File OZ 20/018 W1, City Park (Lakeshore) Inc., 1381 Lakeshore Road East to permit an 8 to 15 storey condominium apartment building with ground floor commercial space, in support of the recommendations outlined in the report dated April 16, 2021, from the Commissioner of Planning and Building, that concludes that the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning applications are not acceptable from a planning standpoint and should not be approved.

2. That City Council provide the Planning and Building Department with the authority to instruct Legal Services on modifications to the position deemed necessary during or before the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing process, however, if there is a potential for settlement then a report shall be brought back to Council by Legal Services.

3. That two oral submissions be received.

YES (11): Mayor Crombie, Councillor S. Dasko, Councillor K. Ras, Councillor C. Fonseca, Councillor J. Kovac, Councillor R. Starr, Councillor D. Damerla, Councillor M. Mahoney, Councillor S. McFadden, Councillor G. Carlson , and Councillor C. Parrish Carried (11 to 0)
 

GenerationLee

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
752
Reaction score
944
City:
Toronto
That's ridiculous. This area is perfect for more density....8 and 15 floors isnt exactly that substantial. I'm disappointed in the council...the townhouse block being built near Dundas n Hurontario is another project which is wholly inappropriate for it's site...I hope this doesn't become 2 floor townhouses. As usual these comments are purely hogwash and not convincing.
 

Top