Northern Light said:
Comments: On Built Form Planning is just plain wrong here. I think this one of those proposals on which most of us here agree and for which we have collective enthusiasm, even if the adjacent SFH were to hold on a bit longer, I don't think these issues play. But I also think its important to note that much of that SFH is surely on its way out, and to plan accordingly. The density of East Harbour, and the MTSA here, will dicate intensification along the Eastern Avenue frontage, and that will push north. Protecting demolition fodder is not a reasonable action here.
Click to expand...
Exactly my confusion, why is planning trying to downgrade a building that will undoubtably outlast the 'neighbourhood' behind it, soon to become as you said demolition fodder based off an MTSA that the city itself has created for provincial approval. Seems like there's a few people on staff who can't quite face the music.
 
jmi22 said:
Exactly my confusion, why is planning trying to downgrade a building that will undoubtably outlast the 'neighbourhood' behind it, soon to become as you said demolition fodder based off an MTSA that the city itself has created for provincial approval. Seems like there's a few people on staff who can't quite face the music.
Click to expand...
Toxic local politics, combined with a not very brave, multi-decade local City Councillor in Toronto-Danforth who prefers to complain about "..All of the changes that are being forced upon them by Doug Ford"...

beachmetro.com

Ontario's Transit Oriented Communities are not prioritizing affordable housing space in Toronto, says local councillor – Beach Metro Community News

By AMARACHI AMADIKE, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter While the Ontario government recently announced six new Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) in Toronto’s east end, a local councillor is reminding the province that no progress on affordable housing at the sites is being made. The province...
beachmetro.com beachmetro.com
 
jmi22 said:
Exactly my confusion, why is planning trying to downgrade a building that will undoubtably outlast the 'neighbourhood' behind it, soon to become as you said demolition fodder based off an MTSA that the city itself has created for provincial approval. Seems like there's a few people on staff who can't quite face the music.
Click to expand...

@HousingNowTO 's response above is on-point.

Sometimes, when Planning seems to make a poor decision, it is absolutely on them; sometimes, you really need to look to the local councillor.

What Planning has said here is wrong in my view. I don't mind Planning taking issues w/heights, at times, or considering impacts on heritage or quality of life.

But this is considerably above-average architecture, it's not particularly tall, and entirely reasonable in the MTSA context. So one can either determine that Planning has lost its mind on this one, or that someone put their thumb on the scale.
 
rdaner said:
Just on the topic of density at sites like this and resistance I will add that pressure to upzone is also coming from the Federal government.
Click to expand...

The Feds are really more interested in the systemic rules (like the as-of-right 6 storey on main streets).

The one-off sites, unless Federally owned, don't tend to generate keen interest.
 
DSC said:
WOW, there's a real NIMBY example! Reminds me of the folks at 60 Colbourne who objected to 65 King (the Google Building) a few years ago. Just as those at 30 Church (built in the early 1980s) objected to 60 Colbourne!

(75 and 45 The Esplanade are a similar pair; 75 was only built a couple of years ago but still find the proposed height of 45 too much! (The actual form of 45 is maybe a reasonable thing to complain about, though I hear it is under revision.)
Click to expand...
Yeah this seems to happen to street car a lot. They are working on a six-story condo project in my town with the exact same issues of people fighting against them
 
Northern Light said:
I hope this one makes it out the other end of process looking a lot like it does now and is of comparable quality at the end.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't count on it. This is Streetcar Developments we're talking about after all. What they've done at Riverside Square leaves me with little hope that the end product will look anywhere as nice as the architectural drawings they've presented.
 
Just to capture the current state of this site


20240329_154737.jpg
20240329_154749.jpg
20240329_154818.jpg
20240329_154837.jpg
20240329_154913.jpg
 
smably said:
Amazing that these houses are still standing! I lived a few doors down from here in 2011, and even then, they were abandoned and derelict.
Click to expand...

I don't know what's more shocking, your story of homes in Toronto sitting abandoned for more than 13 years............or the idea that you were once an east ender! Close call.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top