AlbertC said:
trnto.com

Development proposed at Yonge and Davisville includes heritage buildings | TRNTO.com

Residents are concerned about the increasing population of the area
trnto.com trnto.com
Click to expand...

I'm willing to entertain (to a point), concerns about height/shadows/parks/streetwalls etc.

Because these are, at least, real things.

We can reasonably agree or disagree as to what standards may be appropriate in general, or at this location or another..........but we can agree these are at least concerns that could, hypothetically, have legitimacy.

On the other hand............From the article quoted by Albert.............

“Where are people going to get their basics, like food?” he said.

Uhhh, the new Farm Boy 3 blocks to the north? The Sobeys one block to the south? The Metro 1 block north of the FarmBoy?

Don't get me wrong, I believe in supporting indy/local retail; and were that the argument, there is space for constructive engagement.

But the notion that Yonge/Davisville will be a food desert..........uuhhhh..........No.
 
toronto.webex.com

Meet virtually with Cisco Webex. Anytime, anywhere, on any device.

Simple, modern video meetings for everyone on the world's most popular and trusted collaboration platform.
toronto.webex.com toronto.webex.com


Event Information: 1913-1951 Yonge Street, 17-21 Millwood Road & 22 Davisville Avenue Community Consultation Meeting

Date and time:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 6:30 pm
Eastern Standard Time (Toronto, GMT-05:00)
Change time zone
Duration:1 hour 30 minutes
Description:
The City has received an application by 1644137 Ontario Inc. to amend the Zoning By-law to permit two mixed-use buildings at 30 and 45 storeys connected by an 8-storey base building. The proposal would contain 821 residential units and 2,569 m² of ground floor commercial space. There are 442 vehicular parking spaces and 1,008 bicycle parking spaces proposed in a four-level underground garage.

Please visit the Site's Application Information Centre website at https://www.toronto.ca/1913YongeSt for more information.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Can you post the thread for the benefit of the blocked, @AlbertC?
Click to expand...

The petition page:

joshmatlow.ca

Make Your Voice Heard: Tell Doug Ford to Put Our Community's Quality of Life Before the Financial Interests of Developers!

After signing, please remember to share the petition with friends, family, and neighbours:
joshmatlow.ca joshmatlow.ca


Thread:

matlow.JPG
matlow2.JPG
 
More commentary from Matlow:

trnto.com

Revised Toronto condo development plan gets even taller

The revised plan is, a local councillor said, a result of provincial changes he says favour the development industry
trnto.com trnto.com

A plan to develop the northeast corner of Yonge Street and Davisville Avenue has been expanded, and the revised plan is, a local councillor said, a result of provincial changes he says favour the development industry.

Last fall, planning consultants Bousfields submitted a zoning bylaw amendment application to the city on behalf of Times Group Corporation to develop a 0.57-hectare property at the northeast corner of Yonge Street and Davisville Avenue. The rezoning would permit the construction of two towers of 30 and 45 storeys in height, containing 821 residential units and connected by an eight-storey podium.

“The greediness of this developer’s proposal is not only the fault of the developer. The signal that they received to come in with such an excessive proposal was created by the Ford government,” said city councillor Josh Matlow.

The application covers an area of land stretching from 1913 to 1951 Yonge St., as well as 22 Davisville Ave. and 17 and 21 Millwood Rd., including six existing buildings, five of which are listed on the City of Toronto’s Heritage Register.

An earlier rezoning application for the area was filed with the city in March of 2017. The revised application features taller towers and has been expanded to incorporate additional properties.

Councillor Josh Matlow has concerns about the proposed development’s height and massing, its shadow effects on the surrounding area, the absence of affordable housing and the development’s impact on local infrastructure.

“In the Davisville village neighbourhood, the heights of the buildings, due to the government’s changes, doubled overnight. That’s what happened,” Matlow said. “They took out a number of the requirements for quality of life provisions that I fought for and the community fought for.”

Matlow added full heritage designation may be pursued.

“We will use every tool that the law provides under the Ontario Heritage Act. Right now we are trying to convince the developer to be respectful of the heritage listing that is there today,” said Matlow.
Click to expand...
 
As much as I have enjoyed Kramer's over the years, the only heritage building on that block is the (now former :( ) Starbucks at the corner that is not included in this proposal.

Matlow's use of his councilor authority to push for a frivolous heritage listing of the properties isn't exactly the most compelling argument against the development.
 
WislaHD said:
As much as I have enjoyed Kramer's over the years, the only heritage building on that block is the (now former :( ) Starbucks at the corner that is not included in this proposal.

Matlow's use of his councilor authority to push for a frivolous heritage listing of the properties isn't exactly the most compelling argument against the development.
Click to expand...

I concur on the heritage front.

Though there are legitimate concerns w/this proposal.

The streetwall along Yonge is non-contextual and oppressive.

There are other legitimate concerns as well.

*****

Though, in this case, if Matlow is using the heritage designation solely as leverage to get the developer to play ball; I'm not unsympathetic.

It's a wrongful way of using that tool; but it's being used to combat a developer who isn't being particularly reasonable either.

Two wrongs do not make a right; but one wrong might well elicit another just the same.
 
Request for Direction report to the May 19th meeting of TEYCC seeking to oppose this at LPAT.

Interestingly, the report is comparatively gentle on the application, leading me to conclude a settlement is quite plausible here.


Of interest, from the report, is how the applicant would seek to fulfil and offsite parkland dedication.

1620221834055.png


It appears, based on this, that the City is seeking to assemble a park along the entire Soudan frontage east of Holly.
 
WHATS WRONG WITH PPL IN THIS FORUM?!
Extremely sus that most commenters here are PR...
the builder originally came in with 25 and 34 stories when there was an uproar about simply inconsistent height with the surrounding development let alone the shadow it is going to cast on vegetations that going to die THEN Times double down to 30- and 45-stories??

the people here are clapping be like "yeeee finally some HEIGHT"...."Anti-Development Crowd blah blah blah" it's sad to look at.....
 
innsertnamehere said:
How dare people think we should have more housing in a housing crisis?

just because we don’t agree doesn’t mean we are PR for developers lol
Click to expand...
WHAT HOUSING CRISIS?

the vacancy rate is at 50 years high n you can finally rent a decent 2 split beds in dt with 2500 or less... the one needs housing the most aka hobos are not gonna able to afford boogie condos that goes for 1250+/sf, so yeah we dont need more high end high-rise that only "investors" can afford, WHERE IS THE LOW INCOME RENTAL UNIT?? there is none n most of the time luxury condo units REPLACE rent contol apartment but everyone is too busy admiring the latest addition to the "100m list" than addressing the ACTUAL housing crisis which is the evergrowing homeless pop.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top