SIGNAGE_20210612.jpg


Eastern Ave Side signage.
 
Commentary from Councillor Bradford:

www.bradbradford.ca

Misinformation about affordable housing proposed for 1631 Queen Street East (Queen & Coxwell) — Councillor Brad Bradford, Ward 19 Beaches – East York

Hi there, I’m posting this update because many community members have received some problematic and stigmatizing misinformation in the mail and online about the City’s proposal for much needed affordable housing at Queen and Coxwell. Unfortunately, a lot of the information being shared...
www.bradbradford.ca www.bradbradford.ca


Misinformation about affordable housing proposed for 1631 Queen Street East (Queen & Coxwell)​


July 9, 2021

Hi there, I’m posting this update because many community members have received some problematic and stigmatizing misinformation in the mail and online about the City’s proposal for much needed affordable housing at Queen and Coxwell.

Unfortunately, a lot of the information being shared misrepresents the facts and is nothing but untruths. I’m working with the City to look into the legalities of this kind of falsification. In the meantime, I hope this information will help clarify the facts. Please don’t hesitate to reach out to me at any time if you have questions, comments or concerns.

Thanks for all the ways you engage in our special community to make it a better, more inclusive and welcoming place to live.

All the best,

Brad

Fact sheet: Mixed-income housing proposal at 1631 Queen Street East

The proposed development at 1631 Queen Street East is part of the City’s Housing Now initiative. The Housing Now initiative has identified around 20 city-owned sites across Toronto which can be used to develop affordable housing.

This particular site is going to contribute almost 300 new homes to the Housing Now initiative, with half of those being affordable rental units for the kinds of people that we have spent the last 19 months talking about supporting (our frontline health workers, teachers, TTC operators, etc.). The building will also include a new childcare centre, as well as an new public space designed based on principles from Indigenous communities given the rich Indigenous history in the area (Kishigo Lane).

Here are some facts to address the false information being shared online:

  1. The City’s real estate body, CreateTO, is making the rezoning application for this property to the City Planning department. The plans for the site have to meet all of the planning rules, policies and guidelines that any other zoning application has to meet in Toronto. There is no exemption or special treatment when CreateTO applies for changes to zoning.
  1. This property is very large and straddles Queen Street East and Eastern Avenue, a distance of almost 100 metres. The proposal is already for a 6-storeys building on Queen Street East. A taller building is proposed on Eastern Avenue.
  1. The plan meets the Urban Design Guidelines for the area. The buildings are designed to avoid shadowing Queen Street East, and maintain a low-rise, high-street village feel on Queen. The tall buildings are set almost 100 metres back from Queen Street and will not shadow any neighbouring residential properties.
  1. This property cannot and does not set a planning precedent for Queen Street East in general. There are no other properties that straddle Queen and Eastern like this, so the planning approach is different here.
  1. This property is City-owned and will be built in a public-private partnership. The market homes will pay for the affordable homes. The City is planning for 300 or so units across the whole site, with half of those being affordable.
  1. The project could never be 100% affordable because there would be no market units to pay for the new buildings so there would be no housing built. That is not acceptable in a housing crisis.
  1. If the whole site (on Eastern Avenue and Queen Street East) were restricted to 6-storeys, that would be shorter than the 8-storey building already on Eastern, and would limit the total number of new homes to 60 or 70, with only 30 being affordable.
We have a desperate need for affordable housing and this project, as with all of the Housing Now sites across Toronto, are helping to create thousands of new homes for people who need them most.

If you’re interested, here is a link to a recording of the community meeting on June 10th. It includes a presentation from staff explaining what the Housing Now initiative is, what the proposed building will likely look like, and it addresses many of the concerns that have been raised. I’ve also attached a map of the site so you can see how it straddles Queen and Eastern, and a birds-eye view of the planned changes.

In short, I will say that this site – and this Housing Now project – are both incredibly unique and will not set a negative precedent for development on Queen, or disrespect the spirit of the Urban Design Guidelines. As always, if you have questions please don’t hesitate to get in touch. I look forward to the day that we can all meet in person once again.

Thanks again,

Brad
Click to expand...
 
Nice to see. Is it true that a lot of the opposition to a Queen subway came from residents of The Beaches who saw nixing the subway the best way to keep outsiders out?
 
As another month ends... Beaches NIMBY group(s) are still "Freaking-Out" about this affordable-housing project on FaceBook, Change-dot-Org and GoFundMe, etc...

Perhaps, our City Councillor and City Planners in Toronto will use this as a useful learning-experience on "WHY it is a bad idea to let a tiny cohort of comfortably-housed people act as the primary and most-powerful stakeholders when you are creating things like Secondary Plans, Heritage Designations and Urban Design Guides...?"

Today's local NIMBY-pandering policy by default - becomes the fuel for tomorrow's "Angry Mob with Pitchforks" showing-up at City Council. :rolleyes:

BRAT_Facebook_HEIGHT_20210729.png


BRAT_Facebook_Parking_20210719.PNG
 
HousingNowTO said:
Perhaps, our City Councillor and City Planners in Toronto will use this as a useful learning-experience on "WHY it is a bad idea to let a tiny cohort of comfortably-housed people act as the primary and most-powerful stakeholders when you are creating things like Secondary Plans, Heritage Designations and Urban Design Guides...?"
Click to expand...

Hah. If anyone thinks that Gregg Lintern is going to do anything other than make a bunch of vague pronouncements about planning in response to this, I’ve got a bridge to sell them.
 
article in the star about backlash. Not sure why parking is an issue, not everyone can afford or even want a car.
 
So building on a janky lot across from janky lots will change their neighbourhood? How about for the better? Non?

...hint: This ain't that quaint heritage section of The Beaches as illustrated in the post a few above.
 

Toronto needs housing at any height. That includes in the Beach​


Sept. 3, 2021


In real life Bradford did not mock residents or call them NIMBYs. Instead, he wrote a measured opinion piece in the Beach Metro Community News this month explaining that fears about the proposal’s height are misplaced because, he writes, “With a six-storey frontage on Queen Street and most of the density set back onto Eastern Avenue,” the building preserves “the high-street village feel that Queen East is known for.”

But what if the development didn’t preserve the “high-street village feel”? What if the building was 18 storeys fronting Queen? What if it was 30 storeys? Would that be so horrible?

What if just this once residents cared more about building affordable housing at any height than they did about thwarting good plans in the name of “character” and “precedent”?

Bradford won’t call his residents NIMBYs. But I wish he would. In fact, I wish all city councillors in Bradford’s position would do what they will never do: tell antidevelopment types who want to preserve the “village feel” of their neighbourhoods to pick up and move to an actual village. Toronto isn’t Creemore. It’s the fourth-largest city in North America. It’s in desperate need of affordable housing.

And the Housing Now program (under which this project falls) that combines market and affordable rental units on city land is a highly effective model by which to deliver it. And to deliver it for a long time: these affordable rental units will remain affordable for 99 years.

The opposition to good plans like the kind at Queen and Coxwell is not only outlandish (for example, a Beach residents’ petition features graphics of an anthropomorphized skyscraper with sharp teeth staring down small buildings). It’s never-ending.

“Height is a regular complaint on almost every Housing Now site,” says Mark Richardson, the technical lead at Housing Now TO. “We haven’t seen any Housing Now site (so far) where someone or some group didn’t complain about the height. It’s a consistent complaint no matter if it is 18 storeys or 40 storeys.”

Residents opposed to these projects claim their concerns aren’t purely esthetic. They say they want all units to be affordable. But it’s telling that the affordability issue often takes a back seat to concerns about height and neighbourhood “feel.” Whether the opposition exists in the Beach or in the Annex, it’s telling that residents say they support affordable housing — but only yay high.
Click to expand...

www.thestar.com

Opinion | Toronto needs housing at any height. That includes in the Beach

If the city’s NIMBYs want a ‘village feel,’ they should pick up and move to an actual village, writes Emma Teitel.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com

outline.com is available for purchase - Sedo.com

outline.com outline.com
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top