Interesting article. I hope it is correct and that this will in fact now move forward. Very interesting that literally every article about this project paints KWT as being very opposed to the project.
I guess now she will finally be able to focus on other things. I imagine in a sense this must be a relief to have settled finally to both Mizrahi and KWT.
 
stjames2queenwest said:
Interesting article. I hope it is correct and that this will in fact now move forward. Very interesting that literally every article about this project paints KWT as being very opposed to the project.
I guess now she will finally be able to focus on other things. I imagine in a sense this must be a relief to have settled finally to both Mizrahi and KWT.
Click to expand...

The pro-build tall, taller, TALLER!!!! Urban Toronto strikes again.

I don't want Denzil Minnan-Wong coming in, picking fights with Wong-Tam, and interfering in our ward. Let Denzil stick to development applications in Ward 34, they elected him.
 
ShonTron said:
I don't want Denzil Minnan-Wong coming in, picking fights with Wong-Tam, and interfering in our ward. Let Denzil stick to development applications in Ward 34, they elected him.
Click to expand...

I certainly agree when it comes to DMW. I don't want him involved in anything, to be honest. Maybe the installation of stop signs in Ward 34, but I don't even want to see him making major decisions for his own ward.

But City wards should not be fiefdoms. One of the problems with planning in this town is that they effectively are fiefdoms, and that's not good for planning or this city. So, while I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment about DMW, I am troubled with the suggestion that no one but KWT can "interfere" with that ward.
 
ShonTron said:
The pro-build tall, taller, TALLER!!!! Urban Toronto strikes again.

I don't want Denzil Minnan-Wong coming in, picking fights with Wong-Tam, and interfering in our ward. Let Denzil stick to development applications in Ward 34, they elected him.
Click to expand...

I am supportive of this particular proposal - having said that, depending on DMW on exceptional architecture is about as safe as counting on him to give an OK to a spectacular waterfront - you just don't do it.

AoD
 
Skeezix said:
But City wards should not be fiefdoms. One of the problems with planning in this town is that they effectively are fiefdoms, and that's not good for planning or this city. So, while I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment about DMW, I am troubled with the suggestion that no one but KWT can "interfere" with that ward.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree - though realistically it's a one-way street - how often would you see interference in say Humbertown for the sake of "good planning"? He doesn't even belong to the same CC.

AoD
 
Skeezix said:
I certainly agree when it comes to DMW. I don't want him involved in anything, to be honest. Maybe the installation of stop signs in Ward 34, but I don't even want to see him making major decisions for his own ward.

But City wards should not be fiefdoms. One of the problems with planning in this town is that they effectively are fiefdoms, and that's not good for planning or this city. So, while I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiment about DMW, I am troubled with the suggestion that no one but KWT can "interfere" with that ward.
Click to expand...

The way she was shut out by DMW and the Mayor, and the aggressiveness of Mizrahi bother me far more than the height of this proposal. KWT has to deal with a lot of proposals, and she and her staff are overworked. The Mayor has been blocking the ward review approval, saying that we don't need more politicans, and he's the one who appointed Denzil Minnan-Wong as Deputy Mayor, and got some real duds appointed to crucial committees. I'm fed up with the way downtown councillors and city staff have been treated under the Ford and Tory administrations.
 
Automation Gallery said:
ooh poor her, cant touch that leftie?...
Cressy, Layton and Perks have ganged up on many developments proposed in different Wards of the west end of Toronto, and that's OK?
Click to expand...
If you think the downtown lefties have any sway with the mayor's office on developments outside their wards, I have a bridge to sell you.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Oh I agree - though realistically it's a one-way street - how often would you see interference in say Humbertown for the sake of "good planning"? He doesn't even belong to the same CC.

AoD
Click to expand...

ShonTron said:
[...] I'm fed up with the way downtown councillors and city staff have been treated under the Ford and Tory administrations.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong. I am not defending DMW, or his particular involvement here, just some of the general practices at Council.
 
So things are looking good for this project now that there is an agreement between the developer and the city. When can we expect construction to begin? (I realize shoring could begin sooner, but actual construction I'm assuming is still a year off?)
 
Praxus said:
The WAH it's too tall, let's keep Toronto a boring provincial backwater crowd certainly strikes often enough. Thank heavens for the OMB.
Click to expand...

That's a simplification - neither the default pro-tall nor the NIMBY crowd cared about anything but height. That's the backwater aspect - and it's an equal opportunity label.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
That's a simplification - neither the default pro-tall nor the NIMBY crowd cared about anything but height. That's the backwater aspect - and it's an equal opportunity label.

AoD
Click to expand...

For the record, it's also absurd in the extreme to characterize current-state-Toronto as a "boring provincial backwater", if that was the intent of the original comment. Sure, there are a host of current councillors (even a majority, it could easily be argued) who are actively trying to make it so, but that's very different from the state of the city itself.

Toronto is a fantastic city despite City Council and, frankly, it would continue to be regardless of the final decision rendered on any particular real estate development, this one included.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
That's a simplification - neither the default pro-tall nor the NIMBY crowd cared about anything but height. That's the backwater aspect - and it's an equal opportunity label.

AoD
Click to expand...

I think you nailed it, everyone takes their partisan corners on height and not much else it seems.

Would it not be best for Toronto to have something that prevents local politics from running the show, but also prevents something like the OMB from completely ignoring the local context, or local issues, for the sake of considering (what appears to be) only the details of the official plan?

Also I think density seems to be a much more important factor than height, and this is often not considered by many height fans. Density and number of units overall, and the impacts that will have on strained infrastructure. Perhaps we should be considering some form of taxation for densities over a certain amount? (Is this already in place? I am admittedly not up to date on development legislation.)
 
Urban-Affair said:
Also I think density seems to be a much more important factor than height, and this is often not considered by many height fans. Density and number of units overall, and the impacts that will have on strained infrastructure. Perhaps we should be considering some form of taxation for densities over a certain amount? (Is this already in place? I am admittedly not up to date on development legislation.)
Click to expand...

This is something that I've thought for a long time. What should primarily be regulated in the City's Official Plans is the density of a proposed development, not the heights. It's density that has the much greater impact on services, street traffic, etc.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top