Toronto 2-20 Glazebrook | 130.67m | 38s | Gairloch | Gabriel Fain

Northern Light said:
A group of locals, among them a resident who is a 'commercial real estate developer' is trying to push Gairloch into allowing the vacant homes to be fixed up a social housing on an interim-use basis; likely for refugee families.


The point is made that these properties should be subject to the Vacant Home Tax currently, at a cost exceeding $100,000 per year, apart from routing taxes, and insurance.

Apparently the locals are being stone-walled.
Click to expand...
Denying a demolition permit and then trying to levy a vacant home tax on said homes you wouldn't let be demolished is just perfect.

East Midtown still practicing one of the purest strains of NIMBYISM like no one else.

Never mind the ridiculous "refugee housing" proposal that would most certainly result in the biggest PR nightmare of all time when construction actually came forward and thus evictions were necessary, but I think these "advocates" know that.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Approved.
Click to expand...

About to be Appealed! LOL

By the City, at the local Councillor's behest.


From the above:

1774018510879.png
 
biospherian said:
How likely is the appeal to have any effect on setting this back? I really want this one to go through.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, the worst that can be done is overturning the Committee of Adjustment decision on the minor variances. The underlying site specific ZBA for 33(?) stories would still be in force. The question is, how many of the other technical variances on that CoA decision does the developer need and how badly do they want them.
 
Torontonians' tax dollars hard at work, litigating the work of other tax dollars which approved the variance altering the original settlement decision that further tax dollars agreed was appropriate. The degree to which approvals in Toronto are a consultant/lawyer-churn spin cycle is mind boggling...

HeartoftheTempest said:
As I understand it, the worst that can be done is overturning the Committee of Adjustment decision on the minor variances. The underlying site specific ZBA for 33(?) stories would still be in force. The question is, how many of the other technical variances on that CoA decision does the developer need and how badly do they want them.
Click to expand...
TLAB is a kangaroo court at best so this could really go either way. But you are correct, the underlying site specific bylaw would still be preserved so it's not like they're going to square one if a loss delivered.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top