androiduk
Senior Member
Meeting scheduled for July 29 @ 8 PM, 519 Community Centre. According to the flyer both Developer and Architect will be making presentations.
|
|
|
596 Church Street (Church 18 Holdings, 25s, RAW) DEAD
- Thread starter Automation Gallery
- Start date
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
I'm on the email distribution list of the Glouster Mansions group. The latest news from a July 20th email is that they made their deputations at the Toronto and York East Community Council meeting on June 23rd and presented a petition with 150 names asking for a public consultation on the proposed development before July 31st but it was rejected by Councillor Kyle Rae. According to the email, the developer, Kyle Rae and the City Planner have been invited to the meeting on July 29th, hopefully they will all attend.
mgl
Active Member
I believe the building is now on hold:
http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/City_election_puts_ChurchGloucester_25storey_development_on_hold-8954.aspx
http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/City_election_puts_ChurchGloucester_25storey_development_on_hold-8954.aspx
Peepers
Banned
Only until after the election in a few months.
What the story highlights is how useless Kyle Rae is. Quote: "Rae won’t comment on the revised plans in the rezoning application, saying that he isn’t familiar with them" How can he not be familiar with this proposal? Its his job to be informed! Just because he is not facing reelection is no reason for him to stop working for his constituents.
Also from the city planner: “The councillor [Kyle Rae] has indicated that he doesn’t want this application to be an election issue, so he doesn’t want to hold a formal consultation until after the election. That’s not my decision, that’s council’s decision, but I have to abide by that,” says Macrae
Why doesn't Kyle Rae want this to become an election issue? Rae should have been leading the charge against this development but it seems to me that he is doing his best to keep it under the radar.
mgl
Active Member
I don't get the opposition to building a modest tower at this location. I don't particularly like the building and I think the plan needs more work, but a 25-storey residential building is hardly a "black death star", to quote Xtra quoting somebody at the meeting. The article quotes somebody as saying we need 'human-scale development' but I think that's just opposition to intensification.
I think the city planners are correct to be concerned with the 2-way traffic for building entry, and they're correct about the lack of 2-bedroom rental replacement.
So what do the opponents think would be appropriate at this location? Nothing?
It's not the first location I would have chosen if I were a developer. I'd prefer that somebody buy an eyesore like the LCBO lot and redevelop it first. And I'd prefer that Plazacorp move ahead with its spot at 46/50 Wellesley.
I think the city planners are correct to be concerned with the 2-way traffic for building entry, and they're correct about the lack of 2-bedroom rental replacement.
So what do the opponents think would be appropriate at this location? Nothing?
It's not the first location I would have chosen if I were a developer. I'd prefer that somebody buy an eyesore like the LCBO lot and redevelop it first. And I'd prefer that Plazacorp move ahead with its spot at 46/50 Wellesley.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
My interpretation of the 'black death star' reference arises from what this project will do to this historic block as a whole, not so much the proposed building itself. There is some opposition to the tower partly because of it's current design and partly because some don't want it but most of the concern comes out of the demolition of the heritage properties, relocation of existing residents and Gloucester Street being proposed as a two way street. I'm no planner but I think that an entrance to the parking off a lane-way from Dundonald Street and the parking exit onto Gloucester Street would avoid turning Gloucester into a two-way. I've seen other condos design parking access like this in tight spaces from one-way streets. "As is" I oppose this project. If the building could be integrated into the block without losing the front of the heritage properties that line Church and most of Gloucester Street, the tower designed thinner and perhaps a few floors higher to compensate then I'd reconsider after seeing a revised proposal.
adma
Superstar
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Reminder!!!
The next meeting on the proposed 596 Church Street project will take place tomorrow, Thursday July 29th, 8:00pm at the 519 Community Centre, located on the east side of Church St. at number 519, just north of Wellesley Street. The Developer, Councillor Kyle Rae, and the City Planner Mr. Willie Macrae, have all been invited to the meeting.
The next meeting on the proposed 596 Church Street project will take place tomorrow, Thursday July 29th, 8:00pm at the 519 Community Centre, located on the east side of Church St. at number 519, just north of Wellesley Street. The Developer, Councillor Kyle Rae, and the City Planner Mr. Willie Macrae, have all been invited to the meeting.
adma
Superstar
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
A community meeting will be held regarding this proposal tomorrow evening (Nov. 2nd), 7:00 pm at the 519 Community Centre (519 Church Street, just north of Wellesley on the east side of the street). This meeting has been arranged by the new Church-Wellesley Residents Association and will feature guest speaker Mr. William MacRae, City of Toronto Planner. Also up for discussion is the proposal to build another condo a little further north on Church Street on the N/W corner of Church and Isabella. It should be an interesting evening.
I'm going to do my very best to be there. If I can, I will take notes and report back on anything of substance.
I'm going to do my very best to be there. If I can, I will take notes and report back on anything of substance.
condovo
Senior Member
Raise the height, slim it down, keep the nice walk-up on Gloucester, and I'm fine with it. Do 519ers want to work with the developers to make the project better or do they just want to scuttle it outright? As far as I'm concerned, this development means more eyes on the street/appalling Cawthra Park, which can only be a good thing.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Hey condovo, why do you keep knocking Cawthra Park? I watched the garbage comment that you made and it's not true. The side of the building is kept very clean almost all of the time. Cawthra Park is a wonderful, well maintained little park although I'm concerned about the water feature being removed in October which I'm hoping will be replaced next season, so I'm curious as to why your so down on it.
Anyway, at the first meeting I attended which was arranged by residents of the affected buildings, they want to work with the developer on the project. I don't know if the mindset has shifted since then as I missed the second meeting and the meeting when the Church-Wellesley Residents Association was formed. I have no information on the pulse of what the community feels about the development at Church & Isabella. If I can make it tomorrow, I'll report back.
I'm also going to try and join the Church-Wellesley Residents Association if they need any more members as I'm the Chair of the Tenants Association in my building and I think it would be advantageous for our Tenants Association (a building with 700+ residents) to know whats going on and perhaps have a bit of input with the Residents Association (namely to do with crime in the area), plus I love this neighbourhood and would simply like to be involved and help out wherever I can if possible.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
This evening's meeting was attended by City Planners Willie Macrae and Alex Tiexera, Mr. Macrae chaired the meeting using a Powerpoint presentation.
The purpose of this meeting was to walk concerned local residents through the entire planning process, Mr. Macrae was engaging, spoke very well and walked us through how an application first begins through to approval. In between he explained numerous processes, guidelines and consultations that each application goes through and what factors are taken into consideration for each location and each proposal. He also touched on political influence by City Councillors and the OMB. Mr. Macrae did not speak to the 66 Isabella proposal but near the end of the meeting he did indicate that he wrote a 12 page refusal report for the 580 Church St. project (which got him a room full of applause), but that is by no means a "done deal". He stressed the importance of community groups (such as the newly formed Church-Wellesley Residents Association) having influence on planning decisions along with input to both himself and the Ward Councillor by phone, email or snail mail. Everyone can make a difference. Mr. Macrae also mentioned a proposal at Church & Granby Sts. but no further information was given.
The community public consulting process on the 580 Church project (and I think 66 Isabella) will take place sometime in January or perhaps shortly after that. The new City Councillor has to be sworn in, settled, brought up to speed and then meetings setup. At the end he took questions from the audience.
My sense is (and I could be wrong) that the 580 Church Street proposal is now meeting with some resistance as opposed to the first meeting where the feeling was to work with the developer on the project. But the proposal is still very early in the planning/consultation stages, anything can happen in the next year or two before the project is approved or denied.
The purpose of this meeting was to walk concerned local residents through the entire planning process, Mr. Macrae was engaging, spoke very well and walked us through how an application first begins through to approval. In between he explained numerous processes, guidelines and consultations that each application goes through and what factors are taken into consideration for each location and each proposal. He also touched on political influence by City Councillors and the OMB. Mr. Macrae did not speak to the 66 Isabella proposal but near the end of the meeting he did indicate that he wrote a 12 page refusal report for the 580 Church St. project (which got him a room full of applause), but that is by no means a "done deal". He stressed the importance of community groups (such as the newly formed Church-Wellesley Residents Association) having influence on planning decisions along with input to both himself and the Ward Councillor by phone, email or snail mail. Everyone can make a difference. Mr. Macrae also mentioned a proposal at Church & Granby Sts. but no further information was given.
The community public consulting process on the 580 Church project (and I think 66 Isabella) will take place sometime in January or perhaps shortly after that. The new City Councillor has to be sworn in, settled, brought up to speed and then meetings setup. At the end he took questions from the audience.
My sense is (and I could be wrong) that the 580 Church Street proposal is now meeting with some resistance as opposed to the first meeting where the feeling was to work with the developer on the project. But the proposal is still very early in the planning/consultation stages, anything can happen in the next year or two before the project is approved or denied.
greenleaf
Senior Member
Thanks for the update dt!I wish I could have attended and appreciate the recap.
condovo
Senior Member
Thanks from me too, dt. BTW, I walk by / through Cawthra Park about twice a month and, yes, it's appalling, especially along Church. Also, I have a friend who lives on Monteith who describes nightly fights between addicts and who takes a steady stream of disgusting pics of used condoms and dirty needles scattered throughout the park. His pleas to The 519 to take ownership of the park have been met with a wall of hostility and, suffice it to say, have gone unheeded. Increase the number of middle-class residents in the 'hood with projects like this and problem solved.
Last edited: