fedplanner said:
I really enjoyed reading the article. It is well worth the wait. I hope many take interchange's advice and voice support!

If you feel strongly about your opinions, let your councilor know! This has the potential of sending a message to both the city and the development community that mediocre will not command public support and that high quality development should be welcomed and encouraged. Below are members of the Toronto\East York Community Council that will presumably vote on Massey Tower around 10 to 11am tomorrow at City Hall. If you can't attend the meeting, consider emailing your councilor.

Gord Perks
Paula Fletcher
Ana Bailão
Janet Davis
Mary Fragedakis
Mike Layton
Josh Matlow
Pam McConnell
Mary-Margaret McMahon
Joe Mihevc
Adam Vaughan
Kristyn Wong-Tam
Click to expand...

I just sent off an email voicing support. In addition to the above Councillors I would include the city clerk. By doing so your email will be officially recorded.

Here is a group email list. You can just copy it and paste it in your email program and it will go to all the proper people:


To: clerk@toronto.ca; councillor_wongtam@toronto.ca; councillor_bailao@toronto.ca; councillor_matlow@toronto.ca; councillor_mcconnell@toronto.ca; councillor_mcmahon@toronto.ca; councillor_perks@toronto.ca; councillor_layton@toronto.ca; councillor_davis@toronto.ca; councillor_fletcher@toronto.ca; councillor_fragedakis@toronto.ca; councillor_mihevc@toronto.ca; councillor_vaughan@toronto.ca



In the Subject line I would recommend adding: Refusal Report - 197, 197R, 199 and 201 Yonge Street - Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment Applications

And in the body:

Toronto and East York Community Council consideration on February 26, 2013
TE22.6
ACTION
10:00 AM

Ward:27
 
Peepers said:
Given this fact why did city planners have concerns about the tower being built on the property line? What "dangerous precedent" were they afraid this would set?
Click to expand...

Maybe the fact that if they support this they're be nailed to the wall to approve any random mid block proposal on Yonge in the 60 storey range?
 
CN Tower said:
Maybe the fact that if they support this they're be nailed to the wall to approve any random mid block proposal on Yonge in the 60 storey range?
Click to expand...

The only valid concern that I could see with this Tower is that there are balcony's on the property line. We now know that MOD and their neighbor Allied Properties have entered into an agreement so there can be no concern about a similar tower being built up against the south elevation.

I don't see a problem with a developer building a 60 storey tower mid block - I wouldn't mind seeing this tower go up to 80 floors. Of course many city planners are opposed to skyscrapers and they look for any excuse to derail such a project so as not to set a "precedent". Another prime example of city planners doing more harm than good.
 
Peepers said:
I just sent off an email voicing support. In addition to the above Councillors I would include the city clerk. By doing so your email will be officially recorded.

Here is a group email list. You can just copy it and paste it in your email program and it will go to all the proper people:
Click to expand...

Thanks for putting that together Peepers, I'll write mine now and send it.

CN Tower said:
It's not a neighborhood. It's a vacuous corridor on outskirts of the financial district. I suppose if hospitals, lifeless street life & jeans shops are your thing this would appeal to your senses. The theatre is great as an in/out attraction. Oh there's always the allure of the occasional Eaton Centre gang shooting that I overlooked as well.
Click to expand...

So no one ever got shot at Square One, Yorkdale, Scarborough Town Centre and every other non-shopping neighbourhood in the city?
Me, I'm a city guy and I'd love to live here if I was in a position to buy and if the floorplans were better. The only thing that would give me pause about buying here are the helicopters that land/take off at St. Michael's Hospital, they can be a problem at night for the residents in the Pantages/Opus and will present the same problem here.
Yonge and Queen is a busy corner, south of Queen the pedestrian traffic thins out dramatically after 7 or 8pm, 9 or 10pm in the summer when tourists abound.
 
Peepers said:
I just sent off an email voicing support. In addition to the above Councillors I would include the city clerk. By doing so your email will be officially recorded.

Here is a group email list. You can just copy it and paste it in your email program and it will go to all the proper people:
Click to expand...

Thanks Peepers. Done.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
One, Yorkdale, Scarborough Town Centre and every other non-shopping neighbourhood in the city?
Me, I'm a city guy and I'd love to live here if I was in a position to buy and if the floorplans were better. The only thing that would give me pause about buying here are the helicopters that land/take off at St. Michael's Hospital, they can be a problem at night for the residents in the Pantages/Opus and will present the same problem here.
Yonge and Queen is a busy corner, south of Queen the pedestrian traffic thins out dramatically after 7 or 8pm, 9 or 10pm in the summer when tourists abound.
Click to expand...

Nicely said, dt.

This development proposal is a grand one, loaded with benefits. I hope the planning department grasps that.
 
TonyV:

The planning department isn't really in the position to horsetrade between the community benefits and the precedent the project could set and the potential troubles that would raise - as mentioned before, that is the call of the elected officials. The merit of this project is clear - and I sincerely hope that they can find a way to approve it and at the same time safeguard the city against potential issues as a result of approving this proposal.

As to the "agreement" between MOD and Allied - I will take it a grain of salt until it's known to be ironclad, given the potentially contradictory information gleaned from the staff report. Personally I find the argument that Allied won't redevelop the property not the most convincing given their track record - however great - at intensifying existing heritage properties.

AoD
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
. The only thing that would give me pause about buying here are the helicopters that land/take off at St. Michael's Hospital, they can be a problem at night for the residents in the Pantages/Opus and will present the same problem here.
Click to expand...

I live quite close to St Michaels, and I can pretty much assure you helicopters noise has never been an issue for me. Actually I remember a few times hearing it when I was walking outside, but never once did I hear it from inside the house during the past three years.
Unless you buy a unit directly facing the landing platform of those choppers and you have your window open most of the time, you shouldn't be overly concerned about it.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
safeguard the city against potential issues as a result of approving this proposal.
Click to expand...

If you're implying that height precedent is a potential issue, by the same logic, the city should've denied all the buildings in the financial district out of similar concern.

If, however, you're referring to potential proximity-related conflicts between Massey and its neighbour, then I agree. Better deal with it now than when lawsuits are involved down the line. However, since Allied has already voiced support for this project, I think that negates the risk of any such issues.
 
DtTO:

If you're implying that height precedent is a potential issue, by the same logic, the city should've denied all the buildings in the financial district out of similar concern.
Click to expand...

Please re-read the staff report - height in itself is not considered to be the primary issue.

If, however, you're referring to potential proximity-related conflicts between Massey and its neighbour, then I agree. Better deal with it now than when lawsuits are involved down the line. However, since Allied has already voiced support for this project, I think that negates the risk of any such issues.
Click to expand...

Voicing isn't an ironclad legal agreement - plus what happens if Allied decide to divest themselves of the property? Again, I am constrasting the agreement between MOD and Allied and the refusal of the latter to provide the city with a legal guarantee. Now that might be a temporal aspect to these two positions, but it certainly something to follow up on.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Ramako:

They could, but until we know the exact terms of the agreement and its' applicability, it remains an issue to be flagged. Certainly councillors should make a decision on the basis of having access to the details, and understanding the implications of said agreement.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
DtTO:

Please re-read the staff report - height in itself is not considered to be the primary issue.

Voicing isn't an ironclad legal agreement - plus what happens if Allied decide to divest themselves of the property? Again, I am constrasting the agreement between MOD and Allied and the refusal of the latter to provide the city with a legal guarantee. Now that might be a temporal aspect to these two positions, but it certainly something to follow up on.

AoD
Click to expand...

Good point. I wonder if buying air rights over the current building from Allied would be an option, since they are clearly not interested in selling the building itself, but also not interested in developing it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top