From Gord Perks's Newsletter:

453-2469 Bloor Street West Community Consultation Meeting

The City has received a Zoning By-law Amendment application for 2453-2469 Bloor St West and so City Planning has scheduled a virtual Community Consultation Meeting for the evening of January 30th at 6pm.

A plan has been proposed to redevelop this space into a 12-storey mass timber mixed-use building with retail on the ground floor, containing 91 residential units, 111 bike parking spaces, and 40 vehicle parking spaces. A pre-application community meeting was held for this site previously on May 8th, 2023. This month's meeting, consisting of a short presentation of the development followed by a Q&A session, will allow you to view the proposal and share your thoughts.

Councillor Perks and City Planning staff, and the applicant will be in attendance to help answer any questions that may arise. You can register for the meeting here: https://toronto.webex.com/weblink/register/rbfac32bd95bca3cfb767e611ef4aa0f5.

Further information on the project and what is being proposed can be found on the City's Application Information Centre website here: www.toronto.ca/2461BloorStW.
Click to expand...
 
christiesplits said:
From Gord Perks's Newsletter:
Click to expand...
Now ya know what ya did, don't ya?

You made me look to see if there was anything new in the Docs.............and....... Lo and Behold:

The Cover Letter from Dec' 23:
1705615332243.png


There does not appear to have been any significant changes.

1705615393667.png

1705615450975.png


1705615475458.png


1705615500267.png


Coda
 
Dropped in on the last hour of the consultation.

Neighbourhood feedback ranged from "oh no the sky is falling" to more reasonable concerns regarding laneway access and parking.

One question from a resident that the city was unable to answer, which I was surprised by, was whether there was local TDSB school capacity. The city planner said that the TDSB had yet to respond to their inquiry regarding capacity. Do school boards typically drag their heels during the development process? Paging @Northern Light.
 
christiesplits said:
Dropped in on the last hour of the consultation.

Neighbourhood feedback ranged from "oh no the sky is falling" to more reasonable concerns regarding laneway access and parking.

One question from a resident that the city was unable to answer, which I was surprised by, was whether there was local TDSB school capacity. The city planner said that the TDSB had yet to respond to their inquiry regarding capacity. Do school boards typically drag their heels during the development process? Paging @Northern Light.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the normal pace of TDSB response is.............but it ought not to be tardy, they produce a capacity utilization rate list pretty much annually.

I bookmarked the one done in 2020.


The nearest elementary school is Runnymede, the projected capacity rate published in 2020 (10-year estimate) is as follows:

1706671277761.png


1706671244551.png


For High School

1706671399148.png

1706671484355.png


I'd have to see the forecast pupil impact; but at these percentages, I don't see any risk of a problem being likely.
 
Northern Light said:
I'm not sure what the normal pace of TDSB response is.............but it ought not to be tardy, they produce a capacity utilization rate list pretty much annually.

I bookmarked the one done in 2020.


The nearest elementary school is Runnymede, the projected capacity rate published in 2020 (10-year estimate) is as follows:

View attachment 536691

View attachment 536690

For High School

View attachment 536692
View attachment 536693

I'd have to see the forecast pupil impact; but at these percentages, I don't see any risk of a problem being likely.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't this fall into Swansea Public School's zone as it is on the south side of Bloor?
 
milanista said:
Wouldn't this fall into Swansea Public School's zone as it is on the south side of Bloor?
Click to expand...

Not sure, I just looked up the nearest schools on the map.

Edit to add: You are correct, this would fall to Swansea as things stand today.

1706713877790.png


That said, Swansea is pretty much smack dab on 100% in this projection. Its also forecast to drop to 96% by the end of the decade.

Swansea is currently not under boundary review, so its likely the school would absorb any excess students in the near term; though any more intensification on Bloor may see a boundary review.
 
Last edited:
Decision Report - Approval Recommended.......... but ***

What's being approved is not exactly what the applicant sought.


From the above:

1710948148753.png


And

1710948208596.png


Also.......

I wrote this on the previous page:

Northern Light said:
Comments:

Like the building massing and material palette.

Landscape Plan; only 3 trees on Bloor, no soil cells; sidewalk seems too narrow on western portion of Bloor frontage, inadequate to potential demand. Not ok.

Easy Fix, remove embayed parking on Bloor; add soil cells and more trees.
Click to expand...

The report says:

1710948374422.png


That bit gets a big thumbs up from me.

****

Now this is interesting......... The City isn't just giving the proposal a hair cut, its also giving them a larger floor plate than they asked for to facilitate Mass Timber and make construction more economical.

1710948492279.png


Almost forgot to flag @Paclo here

Edit to add: I think this merits a flag to @HousingNowTO who may note the angular plane being significantly reduced in respect of repeated stepping, unilaterally by the City.

There's some other language in this report his volunteers may find of interest.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, @Northern Light! Adding images of the original vs. approved massing from the decision doc here. I do think it's nice to see the city reward sustainable development practices with the broader floorplate. I'd love to see more these types of incentives throughout the city.

I know this decision is a compromise, but I'm not really seeing any losers here. The developer is losing some height, but getting a bit more density. The neighbours to the south will get a shorter building, and it appears, no large terraces with "encroaching" views into their yards. More trees for Bloor Street is good for everyone. And this decision was made relatively swiftly while still engaging the community for feedback.
Screenshot 2024-03-21 10.00.52 AM.png
Screenshot 2024-03-21 10.01.08 AM.png


Screenshot 2024-03-21 10.00.26 AM.png
Screenshot 2024-03-21 10.01.44 AM.png
 
Of note, this one has moved through TEYCC; intriguingly, over the applicant's objection, who came to speak and ask for a deferral. They don't like City Planning's version.

Assuming this goes through at Council, which seems likely, it will now be on the Applicant to appeal their approval, should they wish.

Councillor Perks expressed enthusiasm for this novel idea of City Planning re-thinking proposals and passing their own preferred versions.

I would expect then, that we will be seeing much more of this.

To that end I will flag @HousingNowTO on this point.
 
Northern Light said:
Of note, this one has moved through TEYCC; intriguingly, over the applicant's objection, who came to speak and ask for a deferral. They don't like City Planning's version.

Assuming this goes through at Council, which seems likely, it will now be on the Applicant to appeal their approval, should they wish.

Councillor Perks expressed enthusiasm for this novel idea of City Planning re-thinking proposals and passing their own preferred versions.

I would expect then, that we will be seeing much more of this.

To that end I will flag @HousingNowTO on this point.
Click to expand...
I also watched this item at TEYCC and have some observations:

1. The representative for the Swansea Ratepayers Association was a poor presenter, which is unfortunate, because any points of merit were lost in her stumbling delivery. She was not well prepared and did not seem to know a lot of the technical details she was arguing for, which surprised me, because I would have assumed these community advocacy groups speak at city meetings all the time.

2. The applicant's representative did a great job of arguing for a revised submission and presenting updated shadow study data to support the revision. However, the original proposal is really for a 13-, not 12-storey building, as the mechanical roof level has outdoor amenity space. This was called out in the city's decision document and in the community calls. Now the applicant is calling for a true 12-storey revision, and I wonder if any appeal from the applicant would be better received if they had been more upfront from the start.

3. I agree with the councillor's comments about applicants wanting quick decisions on applications but then rejecting the decision when it's one they disagree with. If this drives more appeals, then it really defeats the province's objective to get housing built faster.
 
Very frustrating. May seem an interesting idea for staff to move their own version forward but in reality, it is just a waste of everyone’s time. This will certainly be approved at Council, appealed to OLT and approval given to the applicant’s proposal. A waste of everyone’s time and I hoped the Chair of Planning and Housing would recognize this.
 
Just wanted to say that this is an excellent location for housing! Humber Bay Shores to the south, Baby Point a short walk north, subway and Bloor West Village to the east and Etobicoke City Centre to the west. Plus train to airport, several GO stations7 minutes away and if you drive the 427 is nearby. Expect more of these! Lol
 
BigWillieCollum said:
Very frustrating. May seem an interesting idea for staff to move their own version forward but in reality, it is just a waste of everyone’s time. This will certainly be approved at Council, appealed to OLT and approval given to the applicant’s proposal. A waste of everyone’s time and I hoped the Chair of Planning and Housing would recognize this.
Click to expand...
The Chair of Planning and Housing is Gord Perks, also the city councillor for this ward! 😂
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top