News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 426     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 884     4 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 2.3K     6 

Multiplexes

Extremely frustrating, yes. After over two hours of presentation and debate, a split committee believed that the application was not 'minor' and that 10 new rental apartments should not be constructed in Seaton Village (the final vote was 2-1 with the Chair abstaining on a technical ground). Frustratingly, though Planning and the Councillor's Office supported the application, neither chose to depute or make written submissions to that effect. Embarrassingly, but shrewdly politically, the Councillor even tweeted the following yesterday evening (far too late for any real effect, obviously):

1713448492513.png


There was a groundswell in support over the weekend too. While the NIMBYs went from 39 letters of opposition to 45 by cut off, the 'approve' side went from 26 letters in support to over 100 (I can't give a definite number because there are several that were sent but don't yet appear on the City's website). There are a few ways forward, but that is for the consultant team and the Green Street to decide.

Extremely frustrating stuff.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Extremely frustrating, yes. After over two hours of presentation and debate, a split committee believed that the application was not 'minor' and that 10 new rental apartments should not be constructed in Seaton Village (the final vote was 2-1 with the Chair abstaining on a technical ground). Frustratingly, though Planning and the Councillor's Office supported the application, neither chose to depute or make written submissions to that effect. Embarrassingly, but shrewdly politically, the Councillor even tweeted the following yesterday evening (far too late for any real effect, obviously):

View attachment 557294

There was a groundswell in support over the weekend too. While the NIMBYs went from 39 letters of opposition to 45 by cut off, the 'approve' side went from 26 letters in support to over 100 (I can't give a definite number because there are several that were sent but don't yet appear on the City's website). There are a few ways forward, but that is for the consultant team and the Green Street to decide.

Extremely frustrating stuff.
Click to expand...

Really unfortunate! Something really needs to be to the CoA! Minor variances shouldn’t be a bureaucratic process! This isn’t a 5 storey building, never mind 30 storeys. The community should definitely be aware of any new development, but if a minor variance application meets the Official Plan and other City guidelines (EHON as mentioned in once of the documents for this proposal), it should go through with little conflict!
 
A local firefighter deputed that he was worried the building would be a fire hazard. The member who raised the motion to refuse did so (in part) because he didn't like that one of the applicant's diagrams made the project resemble shipping containers (the architectural expression is brick). Four. Tests. My. Ass.

Just pure bad faith bullshit all around.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Extremely frustrating, yes. After over two hours of presentation and debate, a split committee believed that the application was not 'minor' and that 10 new rental apartments should not be constructed in Seaton Village (the final vote was 2-1 with the Chair abstaining on a technical ground). Frustratingly, though Planning and the Councillor's Office supported the application, neither chose to depute or make written submissions to that effect. Embarrassingly, but shrewdly politically, the Councillor even tweeted the following yesterday evening (far too late for any real effect, obviously):

View attachment 557294

There was a groundswell in support over the weekend too. While the NIMBYs went from 39 letters of opposition to 45 by cut off, the 'approve' side went from 26 letters in support to over 100 (I can't give a definite number because there are several that were sent but don't yet appear on the City's website). There are a few ways forward, but that is for the consultant team and the Green Street to decide.

Extremely frustrating stuff.
Click to expand...

It's a shame that the panel only had 4 members, and which members can make a difference. The chair abstaining means that they were going to vote in the other direction - they must abstain if the vote would create a tie, but otherwise do vote. The committee is supposed to have 5 members each meeting, but quorum is only 3, so sometimes the committee is below a full compliment.
 
junctionist said:
Is there a rule against masonry for these projects? The cladding is almost always some cheap substitute like corrugated metal, EIFS, siding, etc.
Click to expand...
I think it comes down to cost. Metal siding and EIFS are cheap and easy to install compared to masonry.
 
Generally speaking, is there any way to tell at this point in the application process whether a property will be separated and sold as separate units, or if it'll be rental housing (i.e. one landlord)?
 
rdaner said:
Taken 24 April. At the southeast corner of Wallace and Pauline.

View attachment 558919
View attachment 558920
Click to expand...
Believe it or not, that house has been in this state for 10+ years. According to the neighbourhood grapevine, the work was originally done without permits and the city had to step in, though it doesn't look like they've had much success getting it fixed. I can't imagine that the building code allows OSB siding.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top