AlbertC

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
23,168
Reaction score
63,609
101 HEATH ST W
Ward 12 - Tor & E.York District

Proposal for a 3-storey apartment building containin 10 dwelling units, having a residential gross floor area of 1,517 square metres.



1592647181039.png

1592647248432.png

1592647325248.png
 
Tenantsherefor9years said:
If built as proposed, the project will:

  • Be almost 3X larger than the by-law allows
  • Be more than 2.5X deeper than the by-law allows
  • Be more than 2.5X closer to the property lines than the by-law allows
  • Have almost 20% less landscaping than the by-law allows
In addition to all this, the project proposes a partial demolition of the home currently used as apartments for renters and requires the removal of large mature trees. See for yourself at: https://bit.ly/103Application

What does this mean for this neighborhood? This condo is in the middle of our neighborhood, and if it is allowed to pass, the precedent could affect your own home should your neighbors sell to developers. If you rent, it could encourage your landlords to re-develop into condos and put your home at risk. These over-developments can hurt your quality of life and/or your home investment.

You can take action and get updates by signing the petition at:

https://www.change.org/103HeathStW

and tell Councillor Josh Matlow that you expect him to not support this development project at 103 Heath St. W.

You can also reach Councillor Josh Matlow right now: There’s no time to waste!

By phone: 416-392-7906

By email: councillor_matlow@toronto.ca
Click to expand...
booo.

This type of thing is exactly the challenge missing middle faces in this city.
 
Tenantsherefor9years said:
If built as proposed, the project will:

  • Be almost 3X larger than the by-law allows - Good!
  • Be more than 2.5X deeper than the by-law allows - Fine!
  • Be more than 2.5X closer to the property lines than the by-law allows - Fine!
  • Have almost 20% less landscaping than the by-law allows - Fine!
In addition to all this, the project proposes a partial demolition of the home currently used as apartments for renters and requires the removal of large mature trees. See for yourself at: https://bit.ly/103Application -

What does this mean for this neighborhood? This condo is in the middle of our neighborhood, and if it is allowed to pass, the precedent could affect your own home should your neighbors sell to developers. If you rent, it could encourage your landlords to re-develop into condos and put your home at risk. These over-developments can hurt your quality of life and/or your home investment.

You can take action and get updates by signing the petition at:

https://www.change.org/103HeathStW

and tell Councillor Josh Matlow that you expect him to not support this development project at 103 Heath St. W.

You can also reach Councillor Josh Matlow right now: There’s no time to waste!

By phone: 416-392-7906

By email: councillor_matlow@toronto.ca
Click to expand...
This sucks. Do you not have anything better to do than deny new housing?
 
Tenantsherefor9years said:
If built as proposed, the project will:

  • Be almost 3X larger than the by-law allows
  • Be more than 2.5X deeper than the by-law allows
  • Be more than 2.5X closer to the property lines than the by-law allows
  • Have almost 20% less landscaping than the by-law allows
In addition to all this, the project proposes a partial demolition of the home currently used as apartments for renters and requires the removal of large mature trees. See for yourself at: https://bit.ly/103Application

What does this mean for this neighborhood? This condo is in the middle of our neighborhood, and if it is allowed to pass, the precedent could affect your own home should your neighbors sell to developers. If you rent, it could encourage your landlords to re-develop into condos and put your home at risk. These over-developments can hurt your quality of life and/or your home investment.

You can take action and get updates by signing the petition at:

https://www.change.org/103HeathStW

and tell Councillor Josh Matlow that you expect him to not support this development project at 103 Heath St. W.

You can also reach Councillor Josh Matlow right now: There’s no time to waste!

By phone: 416-392-7906

By email: councillor_matlow@toronto.ca
Click to expand...


You enjoy living in a highly walkable and bikeable neighbourhood, well connected with transit and well-connected to employment opportunities, etc.

Toronto is a growing City.

If we can't find three storeys for housing people on an inner city street like Heath Street, where do you propose we find people homes?

Or maybe that's just not your problem.
 
Last edited:


Inclusion on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register- 103 Heath Street West

This item will be considered by Toronto and East York Community Council on February 24, 2021. It will be considered by City Council on March 10, 2021, subject to the actions of the Toronto and East York Community Council.

Summary​
This report recommends that City Council include the property at 103 Heath Street West on the City of Toronto’s Heritage Register for its cultural heritage value.

The subject property is situated on the south side of Heath Street West, between Yonge Street and Avenue Road. It contains a two and a half storey late Victorian-era red brick house constructed in c.1892-1893. The building is amongst the earliest houses built on this section of the south side of Heath Street West in the late 19th century, representing the earliest period in the historical evolution of the street and the Deer Park Neighbourhood. The James Hobbs House (c.1892-1893) is among the few surviving houses developed as part of Registered Plan 365 in the early 1880s-1890s.

Following further research and evaluation, it has been determined that the property at 103 Heath Street West meets Ontario Regulation 9/06, the criteria prescribed for municipal designation under Part IV Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, which the City of Toronto also applies when evaluating properties for its Heritage Register.

Properties on the Heritage Register will be conserved and maintained in accordance with the Official Plan Heritage Policies.

A Site Plan Control application (No. 20 152778 STE 12 SA) was submitted on June 5, 2020 which includes two parcels located at 103 and 101 Heath Street West and is currently under review. A minor variance application is anticipated but not yet submitted. The Site Plan Control application proposes a 3-storey apartment building.​
 
trnto.com

City votes to protect 19th century Victorian home in Deer Park for now

The house has been deemed a significant part of the Deer Park neighbourhood’s history after residents called for its preservation
trnto.com trnto.com

With an impending development looming large, a house dating back to the late 19th century near Avenue and St. Clair has been approved by city council for heritage protection.

The property at 103 Heath St. W. is currently occupied by renters and was included in a development proposal for a three-storey boutique condo along with 101 Heath St. W.

However, the house has been deemed a significant part of the Deer Park neighbourhood’s history by Heritage Planning after residents called for its preservation.

Dating back to 1892-93, the James Hobbs House — named after its owner — is one of the earliest houses built in the area and represents the “earliest period in the historical evolution of the street,” according to a Heritage Planning report.

It is one of the “few surviving houses” developed as part of the Registered Plan 365 from the early 1880s-1890s, the report said.

----------
According to Matlow, the new plan calls for disassembling and then reassembling 103 Heath and incorporating 101 Heath around it, the latter of which is not heritage protected.

“Heritage Planning doesn’t think that’s a good idea,” he said. “[The developer] is going to have some problems with this resubmission.”

Matlow thinks there will end up being a contest for the design and that the project poses an important question of what it really means to preserve a property.

“This is going to be an important one to watch,” he said.

A community consultation meeting will be planned for the near future as the next step in the process, according to Matlow.
Click to expand...
 

“YOUR HOME IS YOUR HAVEN… A SAFE PLACE TO MAKE YOUR OWN… TO ENTERTAIN FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TO CREATE A LIFE YOU LOVE… HAVEN IS NOT JUST A DEVELOPER… HAVEN IS A LIFESTYLE. ” ANTHONY ABATE​

Haven Developments, whose last major public project went down the tubes big time (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rea...ny-asks-for-customer-co-operation-as-project/) is the developer behind this project. They love to project a community-oriented, family-oriented approach to property development (https://www.havendevelopments.ca/ceo-paolo-abate-gives-back-to-toronto/ ) but the real-time experience of interacting with this company is anything but honest, upfront and community-minded. They want what they want and will do anything to get it: other homeowners and their 'havens' on either side of this project for a half city block be damned.

Not only is Haven Developments not willing to engage with the community to reassess the MAJOR 'Minor Variances' in their current plans for 101 - 103 Heath, but they also misrepresented themselves to Councilor Mattow, City of Toronto Planners and the City of Toronto Heritage department. Haven Developments said they were willing to listen and evaluate community suggestions for compromise. It turns out that was never their intention. Instead, Haven Developments and Paolo Abate blindsided Councilor Mattlow, the City Planners and the City Heritage sections by moving to a direct application for a demolition permit to demolish both of these homes on July 28th, 2021, despite the Toronto City Councils' move to designate 103 Heath Street West in June of 2021. This sends the clear message they never intended to collaborate, consult or compromise on any of their plans from the outset; and despite their sales pitch about incorporating the heritage value in the new design, they have no real interest in the heritage value of 103 Heath Street West at all because they would move to demolish the building immediately if they were able to get the permit approved this summer. Heritage value was simply a handy selling feature to raise their company's and their project's profile.

The current plan proposed by Haven Developments calls for building right back to the property line on both properties, impacting the property values of every house on either side for a half city block from halfway down Deer park Crescent along Heath Street West and down Oriole Road. The backyard 'havens' of these residents on all sides of the project? Would now be nearly gone or substantially diminished or impacted. In addition, the process calls for the killing and removal of three 140 to 160-year-old historic trees, the cutting in half the natural ecosystem created by all the side-by-side gardens of all these residences, thereby creating major safety and personal space issues (there is now the potential of someone staring directly into every room on every floor at the back of these homes from as little as 15 feet away).

Should one developer's plans be allowed to compromise and massively reduce the property values of 22 adjacent freehold, townhouse and condo property owners? Is this why the City of Toronto spends millions of dollars developing a current Official City Plan only to permit one entity to take over the lives of half a city block of residents by allowing them to revert to the city urban planning practices of 40 years ago? No, would be our answer. They should not. Would it be possible for Haven to redraw plans so that everyone could benefit including Haven Developments? Absolutely. But that is not what Haven Developments appears to be about. Haven Developments appears to be about greed and making as much money as they can as quickly as they can regardless of the impact their project has on a community.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
One reason these houses cost what they do is that they all have private gardens. This project would reduce the value of the property by taking away each home's private garden in this half block. In addition, the plan calls for walkways around the building. So whether it is someone looking down into your once private garden from their second or third-floor window where there was previously the cover of a large canopy from a cluster of 140-year-old trees or street traffic now gawking at you as they walk by on the other side of the fence, gone are the days of private enjoyment of your residential property.

Secondly, the value of these homes would be reduced by requiring curtains to be closed in every room at the back of each of these homes because if drapes or blinds are not drawn, there is someone now looking directly into each room on each floor at the back of your home from as little as 15 feet away. This half-block would be the only place in this all of Deer Park or Forest Hills neighbourhood where freehold homes had adjacent buildings built this close at the back and side of this size.

Independent property estimates show a reduction of property values post-project anywhere from 20 to 40%. You can find impact evaluations with to-scale drawings of how the privacy of the houses will be impacted on the City of Toronto Committed of Adjustment website, look for 101 Heath for more details.

As an argument, it is not a particularly incisive argument to posit that property values can't be reduced for a particular property in a city where the mean property values are high and ever-increasing; real estate is an investment and removing aspects of the value of a home can most certainly reduce its market value regardless of how high the property values are overall.
 
This development won't be taking away anyone's backyard space. Yes, developers should make an effort to reduce the impact of high density development. At the same time, no sympathy for someone with a nice house in a prestigious neighborhood in an epic housing bubble.
Dotherightthing said:
Independent property estimates show a reduction of property values post-project anywhere from 20 to 40%.
Click to expand...
Doubt it, but I'd love to see the source.
Dotherightthing said:
real estate is an investment
Click to expand...
A massive mistake we made as a country. Real estate is shelter, aka a basic human necessity. It's unethical that we've turned it into an investment. But if it is an investment, why deny others the opportunity to get into the market and surf the bubble?
 
Dotherightthing said:
Would it be possible for Haven to redraw plans so that everyone could benefit including Haven Developments? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

I have a strong suspicion whatever they proposed would be shouted down until the proposal was just a detached house for one family, and even then I imagine the neighbourhood would find a reason to fight it off. What proposal do you imagine is feasible here, worth the time and money, and is even smaller than the 3-storey proposal. Improvements can be made to the design, absolutely, but I strongly, strongly suspect you would not see a set of drawings from them, regardless of the scheme, and go "Yes, this is change I can accept."

The other challenge with creating housing is the pro forma has to work - and I imagine the developer can't cut their project down to a project that is even less than 3 storeys or else the whole thing wouldn't even be feasible. I'm not saying I am a fan of the inflated property values in this city or high construction costs, but in order to create housing we have to be able to accept 3-storey buildings in neighbourhoods. Go to Montreal. Go to any other large city. Detached homes and semi-detached homes alone do not have to be the norm, even in great neighbourhoods.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top