[sixrings]

But spadina and Dundas are downtown and on two street car lines (one a ROW) and a 5 minute walk from a subway. Condos belong here before they belong at Kipling station or Vaughan or wherever. Just because there is ample parking lots in the burbs to be developed on doesn't mean that places with houses shouldn't be redeveloped as well especially in this areas case. Also I don't understand why there is such resistance of condos north of queen and South of blood. Based on some people they would have condos from the waterfront to queen then houses from queen to blood and then again condos from blood to Dupont. Why the huge gap? Why shouldn't this area see development? And btw 24 floors is nothing these days when 50-60 is becoming standards and 80 being the goal.

 

[Tulse]

I'm not saying this area shouldn't be developed, but I question whether going from single-family houses directly to skyscrapers is the appropriate means of intensification. I can certainly see adding a midrise corridor along College from University to Spadina and beyond, but I really question whether a hugely out-of-context project like this one makes development sense here.

 

[Automation Gallery]

I'm not sure how you can infer that position from the locals' complaints -- I think it is a reasonable argument that plopping down a 24 storey tower (much less a 42 storey monstrosity) in a neighbourhood of lowrises is not good development.

I thought we also were talking about 6-8 storey development

^If it wasn't for the NIMBYs we could see 6-8 storey buildings going up all over this neighbourhood. But when it's so hard to get something built, developers might as well shoot for the moon.

 

[Tulse]

But what evidence is there that the locals would oppose appropriate mid-rise development? Have they done so in this neighbourhood in the past?

 

[k10ery]

But what evidence is there that the locals would oppose appropriate mid-rise development? Have they done so in this neighbourhood in the past?

Well, I'm more familiar with area a bit to the west. Off hand I can think of local opposition to 7 storeys at Dundas and Manning, 5 at Bathurst and Niagara, 7 at Queen and Portland. I'm sure the real industry experts around know many more.

 

[adma]

I wouldn't be surprised if they did, particularly if any proposals involved, say, wiping out Victorian street frontage on corridors like Spadina. (Remember: "appropriate" is both a case-by-case basis and in the eye of the beholder.)

 

[Tulse]

Well, I'm more familiar with area a bit to the west. Off hand I can think of local opposition to 7 storeys at Dundas and Manning, 5 at Bathurst and Niagara, 7 at Queen and Portland.

But there are already several 5+ storey buildings on the stretch of College between Spadina and University (although admittedly none of the buildings were put up in the past decade or so).

I wouldn't be surprised if they did, particularly if any proposals involved, say, wiping out Victorian street frontage on corridors like Spadina. (Remember: "appropriate" is both a case-by-case basis and in the eye of the beholder.)

True, but to be honest this ex-UofT student doesn't see nice Victorians, just seedy student eats and other similar establishments. I don't think those buildings are well-served with falafel and pizza slice joints. That, I suppose, it always the tension regarding historical preservation of buildings no longer being maintained well, in that those who own them don't have the money to keep them up, and those with development money don't want to be limited by them.

 

[AlbertC]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article...ecrecy-surrounding-planned-highrise-residence

U of T and its neighbours in conflict over secrecy surrounding planned highrise residence

Published On Sun May 20 2012
Patty Winsa
Urban Affairs Reporter

Confidential negotiations between U of T and a developer for land to build a private highrise residence have instead put up a wall between the institution and its neighbours.

Five area residents’ associations, shut out of negotiations and worried about what rules will govern students, have launched an online petition that calls for the city to refuse the 24-storey project on the south side of College St., east of Spadina Ave.

It asks the university to back out of its 99-year lease agreement with developer Knightstone Capital Management.

“We profoundly object to a public institution getting into bed with any private developer and then walking away, saying they’re institutional lands but we’ve leased them to someone else,” said Susan Dexter, a board member of the Harbord Village Residents’ Association, one of the groups involved. “And that they can do what they choose and the agreements are secret.”

The leased land is a small 600-square-metre site on the south side of College St. The university was given the option to purchase it in 2008 and did so for $2.075 million. Knightstone already owned the adjacent plot.

According to documents found online by the residents associations, U of T agreed to lease the land for a minimum of $350,000 a year for what was then a 30-storey residence. It would be managed by Scion, a Chicago-based company.

“The university has had discussions on several occasions at the community liaison committee on aspects of this project,” responded Kennedy in an email. “And, consistent with our agreement, the developer has been consulting with the community and has made significant changes to the project as a result of those consultations.”

“U of T will handle the leasing. (The residence) will be on their website and they will handle the collection of rents, etc. And flow the money through to us,” Lehberg said. “The university student life people will be on site and have an office in the building. They will be in there managing the building.

“You’ll have University of Toronto graduate students acting as dons for every 35 to 40 students in the building, so on every floor,” added Lehberg, “U of T will have members on the board. Everything is in that (lease) agreement,” with students.

Knightstone has already appealed to the OMB because the city is over the 120-day period it has to handle a zoning application. An initial hearing is scheduled for the fall.

 

[AlbertC]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...iversity-of-toronto-residence/article2439522/

Neighbours ‘going to war’ over plans for University of Toronto residence

JAMES BRADSHAW
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, May. 21, 2012 10:35PM EDT


http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/7248620362/

Private developer Knightstone Capital Management plans to build a 24-storey tower to house 759 students just off the U of T campus, giving the university access to residence spaces it says it badly needs but cannot afford on its own. The university owns part of the land, which it leased to Knightstone.

But when representatives of seven residents associations tried to discuss ways to alter the plan, U of T officials stayed mum, citing a confidentiality agreement inked with Knightstone. Their silence has raised questions over what information public universities owe the broader community, and how much control they should forfeit in their increasing willingness to court private partners.

“The process stinks, and the building stinks, and they’re not going to say a word about it, so we’re going to war. … Co-operation is over,” said Rory (Gus) Sinclair, a board member for the Harbord Village Residents’ Association. “We’ve got a history and a culture of co-operation [with U of T], and that is being dumped over this one project.”

The building itself (south of College Street, between Spadina and Huron Avenues) was enough to draw the ire of nearby residents. They felt it was too tall for the neighbourhood (especially the original plans for 42 storeys), and already being used as a justification for taller towers proposed nearby. And they worried that inviting nearly 800 students not governed by U of T rules would destabilize the area.

A spokesman for U of T said in an e-mail, “the University is sensitive to those concerns,” but “the developer has made significant changes to the proposed project” to address them. He also said U of T “supports the project as a way to help meet some of that need” for student housing in the area.

What is clear is that Knightstone has leased U of T’s portion of the land for 99 years, and will pay the university $350,000 annually in return. The university will not be responsible for the residence, but will promote it through its website and have seats on the building’s advisory committee.

The application to rezone the College Street site will go before the Ontario Municipal Board in August. Meanwhile, the residents’ associations are gathering signatures on a petition and open letter to U of T. But there still remains hope for some détente.

“It’s controversial … but I don’t think anybody’s trying to hide out on the community,” said lead architect Donald Schmitt, of Diamond Schmitt Architects. “I think resolving those apparently competing objectives is possible, and we’re keen to do it.”

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Updates on this proposal and revelations of another one next door - from the Globe:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-to-proposed-u-of-t-residence/article4479535/

AoD

 

[Automation Gallery]

No shadowing issues here...just a bunch of people worried about a bit more than normal density in their hood

Residents of low-lying neighbourhoods protesting a proposed 24-storey student residence just off the University of Toronto campus have expressed concern that one high-rise may beget more.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Looks like their concern is well-founded.

AoD

 

[greenleaf]

I have gathered that there is enough demand from students for housing on/near campus that they could fill about 6 of these towers pretty easily.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Looks like their concern is well-founded. AoD

Well-founded

Went to the meeting tonight. As expected, there was a lot of opposition and local resistance. Even at 24 storeys, this project was unacceptable to the audience. Height, massing, and shadowing were still a large issue. The building having no parking was also a huge issue with the crowd, as some students will inevitably have cars which would require permit parking and overwhelm the already short supply on the streets in the area. The group of people from Glasgow Street, just south of the proposed building, were extra NIMBY-istic because this large mass will directly loom over their small side street. Also concern about the 700 or so units/people in the residence. Issue was brought up regarding the fact the "transient" population will cause safety and garbage concerns to the area. Names such as "boarding house" were shouted out, and typical student residence problems such as partying, drinking, drugs, sleaze, etc. were shared.

Important fact disclosed was that this is a private developers' residence project, not exactly a U of T rez building. The University has a part in developing it but the management will be by the developer (Knightstone?). Locals were concerned that because since this isn't a U of T building, it would pose security and safety problems. The U of T police will not have jurisdiction within this Rez, only private security guards will maintain order. This building will be available for a student of any university/college. People thought this kind of a concept would be potentially dangerous.

Don Schmitt (from Diamond & Schmitt) and Adam Vaughan were there to address the crowd. Schmitt presented two alternate proposals. One was 24s and the other was 22s, with a slight variation at the rear of the building. The would be a lobby entrance on College Street, as well as retail space for a cafe and bookstore. I was impressed by the renderings. The new renderings do look different from the ones we've seen before though. Gone is the fritted/frosted glass. The new design features more standard, grid window. The shape of the tower is still the same though. It reminds me of original design for Cube Lofts (N-Blox?) but with more box shifting. Overall, this revised proposal looks very promising but still faces stiff opposition ahead.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

AG:

Don't put words in my mouth - my reference is to the statement you have quoted, which is (underlined for your benefit):

Residents of low-lying neighbourhoods protesting a proposed 24-storey student residence just off the University of Toronto campus have expressed concern that one high-rise may beget more.

It has nothing to do with whether the rest of their concerns are valid or not.

AoD