modernizt
Senior Member
Fair, but 383 Sorauren isn't without its own precedents either.
- Thread starter someMidTowner
- Start date
Fair, but 383 Sorauren isn't without its own precedents either.
Gotzvon
Active Member
"Change of any kind terrifies me! Please don't touch our dumpy medical center, car wash, or Swiss Chalet! They're treasures!"
sixrings
Senior Member
I would be more willing to move here now. Me and my two vehicles
ADRM
Senior Member
My God, yes, look at all of the "charm and historic nature" residents stand to lose from this ostensibly impending wave of development; the injustice:
Attachments
There is a certain charm to this strip and the question for me is can the charm remain if you replace all the existing buildings. Will these retailers remain or will they be priced out and replaced by the same old chains you find everywhere else.
Attachments
ProjectEnd
Superstar
There certainly is a charm to it. My primary concern would be replicating the cadence of the narrow storefronts. It's very conducive to pedestrian movement and would likely be lost if / when larger buildings are constructed.
jje1000
Senior Member
I think the solution with narrow storefronts will come from city regulations encouraging narrow storefronts rather than wide ones and programs to help local businesses move into the new buildings, rather than blocking development altogether.
Otherwise we'd end up like San Francisco with its chronic nimbyism.
Otherwise we'd end up like San Francisco with its chronic nimbyism.
Just to be clear, those are the buildings on the opposite side of Bloor, which are not threatened by this proposal.
42
I based that image on the notice the NIMBY's created of the entire strip being redeveloped (see previous page). More a what if the entire area goes 8 storeys.
animatronic
Senior Member
Density on the North side could be achieved by topping up the buildings with an extra story or two - as is common elsewhere on Bloor/Danforth.
For whatever reason the North side of Bloor has more character. The three current proposals are all on the South side and will replace 1) the medical arts building and a surface lot, 2) Swiss Chalet and surface lot, and 3) a car wash and a surface lot. Surely we can get those three projects off the ground and then re-assess the street.
Oh I have no problem redoing the entire street as long as the retail is done properly.
animatronic
Senior Member
But what about the 5,000 extra cars? And condo rapists?
PMT
Senior Member
This project is going to the OMB because of the City's failure to respond in time: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2017.EY22.1
An OMB prehearing is scheduled for June 29, 2017: https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDetail.aspx?n=PL170069
Also, a resubmission was made to the City in January; the developers are now seeking 9 storeys.
An OMB prehearing is scheduled for June 29, 2017: https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/ecs/CaseDetail.aspx?n=PL170069
Also, a resubmission was made to the City in January; the developers are now seeking 9 storeys.
AlbertC
Superstar
dowlingm
Senior Member
I was trying to find the reference to the appeal ground (delay). Where can I find direct reference to that? Want to ping the person who wrote this asking them to make it clear that the City is giving developers a free pass when they write articles on OMB appeals: https://www.insidetoronto.com/news-...-brazen-kingsway-development-proposal-at-omb/