The construction taking place to build King Blue takes place off of Mercer st, not King. So I can't fathom construction trucks entering from building on King St.

Further, as it stands, this goes against the rules of the pilot project. Unless it was or will be amended to suit their needs.

As mentioned the alley way out back is a shared alley way that is quite narrow.
 
As per the city, you can't get the clearance to demolish unless you have been given the clearance to build. In this particular spot.

As it stands they have no permits to demolish.

Also, the zoning and site plan are still under review.
 
Ardi said:
As per the city, you can't get the clearance to demolish unless you have been given the clearance to build. In this particular spot.

As it stands they have no permits to demolish.

Also, the zoning and site plan are still under review.
Click to expand...

Yup true, but then again you been around and know very well this development has been in planning for over 3 years,
and too far along to be stopped
 
Ardi said:
As per the city, you can't get the clearance to demolish unless you have been given the clearance to build. In this particular spot.

As it stands they have no permits to demolish.

Also, the zoning and site plan are still under review.
Click to expand...

Release of a demo permit isn't tied to a building permit. It's encouraged to have a redevelopment plan in the system but, it's not absolutely necessary to get a demo permit. Zoning here is approved. The site plan process is to confirm the proposed development fits within the newly approved zoning. This is a done deal.
 
maestro said:
Release of a demo permit isn't tied to a building permit. It's encouraged to have a redevelopment plan in the system but, it's not absolutely necessary to get a demo permit. Zoning here is approved. The site plan process is to confirm the proposed development fits within the newly approved zoning. This is a done deal.
Click to expand...

As per the city the "the zoning and site plan are under review".

Second, the city explicitly said that even after the site and zoning approvals are granted, there is the matter of demolishing. Simply intending to demo is not enough to oust people. Because that makes no logical sense. There needs to be a clear cut measure, and (approval) timeline on when the structure will be demo'd before you ask people to leave. I am a landlord myself. If I had intent to demolish my property, I could not just ask someone to leave. I would need something tangible. At this point it is not tangible.

Either way, when it does go through, I am not disputing that, time remains. To ask the tenants to leave by the end of August seems pre-emptive.

Thoughts?

I will keep people posted. Lot of assumptions and opinions here. Was looking for some assurance, but seems people who are posting have vested interests.

Just to be clear, I understand it is a matter of time. My main contention is with the timeline that was given to me to vacate.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ardi said:
As per the city the "the zoning and site plan are under review".

Second, the city explicitly said that even after the site and zoning approvals are granted, there is the matter of demolishing. Simply intending to demo is not enough to oust people. Because that makes no logical sense. There needs to be a clear cut measure, and (approval) timeline on when the structure will be demo'd before you ask people to leave. I am a landlord myself. If I had intent to demolish my property, I could not just ask someone to leave. I would need something tangible. At this point it is not tangible.

Either way, when it does go through, I am not disputing that, time remains. To ask the tenants to leave by the end of August seems pre-emptive.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

There are circumstances. There's nothing stopping a landlord from given a couple months notice to leave to month to month renters or longer leases with demolition termination clauses. I'm going to assume you're one of these circumstances and probably the first one.
 
Dude, as someone not invested there is no assurance anyone can give you. You better have a plan by then, because you WILL have to leave.
Good luck. I’m sure you will figure out something.
 
maestro said:
There are circumstances. There's nothing stopping a landlord from given a couple months notice to leave to month to month renters or longer leases with demolition termination clauses. I'm going to assume you're one of these circumstances and probably the first one.
Click to expand...


Actually there are several laws that govern landlords from ousting tenants in Ontario. The law states 120 days notice is required when a property is to be redeveloped. Not pending approval. But approved.

Also, no need to assume. I already stated above I was one of the tenants. There are four residential units here.
 
Last edited:
Koops65 said:
You have been given 4 months notice (May, June, July and August) so the 120 day law was followed...
Click to expand...

You must work for Empire. Actually, it wasn't. When an approval is still pending and there no plans to demolish, it wasn't. How do you come to this conclusion?

The intent to build is not legally enough to ask your tenant to leave. Plain and simple.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ardi said:
You must work for Empire. Actually, it wasn't. When an approval is still pending and there no plans to demolish, it wasn't. How do you come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...

LOL work??? I'm a retired security guard dude... I make drawings and renders of Toronto towers...
 
Koops65 said:
LOL work??? I'm a retired security guard dude... I make drawings and renders of Toronto towers...
Click to expand...

My apologies, but you didn't address my question. When the site plan and zoning is still pending how can a developer ask a tenant to move? What if this happened to you. Does it make sense to you?

Also, I love how your pic is Morn from Ds9. I am a huge fan of Ds9. :)
 
I don't pretend to know the law about this stuff. You said 120 days notice is required and the end of Aug is 122 days from today, it's just math. I know you are pissed and all that about this situation, yes I would be too. But the clock is ticking and you had best start making plans and packing up... because the developer didn't evict you on a whim, it's been planned for a long time now.
 
Koops65 said:
I don't pretend to know the law about this stuff. You said 120 days notice is required and the end of Aug is 122 days from today, it's just math. I know you are pissed and all that about this situation, yes I would be too. But the clock is ticking and you had best start making plans and packing up... because the developer didn't evict you on a whim, it's been planned for a long time now.
Click to expand...

I did, and yes I am clearly not happy, but the fact of the matter is that the site plan and zoning changes are pending. Not approved.

Planned is one thing, being allowed to proceed is another. I am just trying to protect my interests, and not be ousted before my time. That is all.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top