• Thread starter TheAlmightyFuzzy
  • Start date
AGTO said:
No mistake, nice attempt at backpeddling though ;)
Click to expand...
Prove it, AGTO, or should I say digi? Find me a quote. If you'd care to take this to private messages, we can spare this thread this asinine discussion.
 
This one seems to be pretty unpopular. Personally I think it turned out pretty awesome! I think it will look even better once it's all lived in.
 
khristopher said:
This one seems to be pretty unpopular. Personally I think it turned out pretty awesome! I think it will look even better once it's all lived in.
Click to expand...

As being 'all lived in' will hardly affect the architecture I assume you think that seeing people's 'junk' on their balconies will improve the building. Well, the painted cladding helped a bit so I suppose we can all hope you are right. :)
 
DSC said:
As being 'all lived in' will hardly affect the architecture I assume you think that seeing people's 'junk' on their balconies will improve the building. Well, the painted cladding helped a bit so I suppose we can all hope you are right. :)
Click to expand...

I meant something more like with the lights on, not junk on their balconies.
 
Minor variance from zoning by-law notice in the window. To convert the commercials space within the proposed 3-storey portion of the development into residential units.

What proposed 3 storey portion? Along Richmond?
 
Ed007Toronto said:
Minor variance from zoning by-law notice in the window. To convert the commercials space within the proposed 3-storey portion of the development into residential units.

What proposed 3 storey portion? Along Richmond?
Click to expand...

Puzzling isn't it. I took it to mean there was 3 storys of Office Commercial over the retail that was being converted. They probably meant to do it from the outset but couldn't get it through Planning.
Where can you find the CofA agenda for Jan 13th?
 
Rusty said:
Puzzling isn't it. I took it to mean there was 3 storys of Office Commercial over the retail that was being converted. They probably meant to do it from the outset but couldn't get it through Planning.
Where can you find the CofA agenda for Jan 13th?
Click to expand...

The C of A Agendas for TEY are at: http://www.toronto.ca/planning/south_schedule_2007.htm
Of course they do not publish their minutes or decisions so knowing what actually happened at a meeting is not so easy to discover!
 
DSC said:
The C of A Agendas for TEY are at: http://www.toronto.ca/planning/south_schedule_2007.htm
Of course they do not publish their minutes or decisions so knowing what actually happened at a meeting is not so easy to discover!
Click to expand...

I hope they keep the ground floor reatil. If not it creates an even larger pedestrian "dead zone" around the black hole known as the Fred Victor Centre.
Here are some of the variances sought and already approved.

"File Number: A0021/10TEY Zoning CR T4.0 C2.0 R4.0 (Waiver)
Owner(s): GLASS HOUSE
DEVELOPMENTS IND
[
Ward: Toronto Centre-Rosedale (28)
Agent: ADAM BROWN
SHERMAN BROWN DRYER
KAROL GOLD LEBOW
Property Address: 127 & 129 QUEEN ST E Community: Toronto
Legal Description: PT GORE IN FRONT PARK LT6
PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION:
To convert the commercial space within the existing three-storey portion of the development fronting onto Richmond
Street into residential units.
REQUESTED VARIANCE(S) TO THE ZONING BY-LAW:
1. Section 4(12), By-law 438-86
A minimum of 176.0m2 of indoor residential amenity space and 176.0m2 of outdoor residential amenity
space is required.
The proposed indoor residential amenity space will be 76.54m2 and the outdoor residential amenity space
will be 106.0m2.
Committee of Adjustment decision A0484/07TEY permitted 76.54m2 of indoor residential amenity space
and 106.0m2 of outdoor residential amenity space.
2. Section 4(5)(B), By-law 438-86
A minimum of 42 resident parking spaces and 5 visitor parking spaces are required.
The development provides 24 resident parking spaces and 5 visitor parking spaces.
Committee of Adjustment decision A0484/07TEY permitted 22 resident parking spaces and 5 visitor parking
spaces on the subject property for 86 residential units.
3. Section 4(13)(A) & (C), By-law 438-86
A minimum of 53 bicycle parking spaces are required for the occupants of the building and 13 bicycle
parking spaces are required for visitors.
The development provides 47 bicycle parking spaces for the occupants of the building and 8 bicycle parking
spaces for visitors.
Committee of Adjustment decision A0484/07TEY permitted 47 bicycle parking spaces for the occupants of
the building and 8 bicycle parking spaces for visitors.
4. Section 4(5)(i)(ii), By-law 438-86
A minimum driveway width of 5.5m is required for a two-driveway aisle.
The driveway width is 4.9m."
 
To convert the commercial space within the existing three-storey portion of the development fronting onto Richmond
Street into residential units.
Click to expand...

It does say Richmond. Right now at Richmond all we have is the parking ramp and no commercial space. I think Queen will stay retail and the "proposed" 3 storey on Richmond is what they are looking to rezone to residential.
 
DSC said:
Of course they do not publish their minutes or decisions so knowing what actually happened at a meeting is not so easy to discover!
Click to expand...

I always found the planners in the C of A City Hall office to be pretty decent to deal with and easy to contact (or at least will promptly return your call). Just call the C of A (416-392-7565) the day after the hearing and find out what planner is managing the file and ask for the decision.

If you ask nicely, they may even e-mail or fax you the Notice of Decision
 
I will be moving in to this apartment soon as a tenant. Just out of curiousity, do you know which neighbourhood this building is considered to be in?

Thanks!
 
You can tell why it's called Moss Park: lotsa women who look like Cocaine Kate hanging around here
 
It's on the boundary between Moss Park / Garden District and the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top