Generalized statements like á full NIMBY bingo card, are accusations without backup. That statement then becomes a potshot as you do not take the time to actually explain the logic of your accusation and therefore it cannot be refuted.
To be honest, your statement implies that everyone reading this post is clear about the definition of NIMBY. Are you sure?
Ok. I'll bite. I looked it up for anyone who cares to read it. And you can read it here too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY
A NIMBY would involve a claim saying NO to the project and advocating it be built elsewhere. . No one here is saying NO build it elsewhere which would make it a NIMBYist claim. It would be welcomed as a 7-unit condo on the same depth footprint as the condo next door, despite strong your innuendo statement of strong suspicions' of wanting it to stay a single-family. Are you crazy - what planet do live on? One of the houses involved in the project s already a four-plex and has been for 20 years. So 5 families were already renting these two spaces making up this project for the last 20 years. Who objected to that? Nó one here. Large houses are turned into 5 units or more every day of the week around here! There are very few people in this neighbourhood who can afford or even want to live in such large houses anymore. This is NOT Foresthill. Wrong neighbourhood. You all don't seem to be much for facts on this site. And some of your arguments belie a disconnect with even a basic understanding of the housing reality in Toronto let alone Deer Park; there are fewer and fewer single-family dwellings in our neighbourhood and that is an accepted part of our lives here. You do not know us at all.
A NIMBY claim would also involve disliking the project. In fact, most letters objecting that are on public record with the Committee of Adjustment regarding the project actually laud the design so no one finds the project unpleasant another key to making a NIMBYist claim regarding the project. There is not one person I know including me who does not find this project beautiful and thinks from a design point of view it would make a lovely addition to the neighbourhood. Beyond that, many people like me appreciate the esthetic of including a heritage home front in a new design.
A NIMBY claim would also involve advocating STRICT adherence to land use. We are saying double the size of the project, sure; and doubling the size of the project alone would already require a MAJOR 'minor variance' so this is not a NIMBYist claim because we are not advocating STRICT land use. And again, why would we? Projects being built around us routinely get minor variance approvals, it is part of our lives here.
So what ARE the actual tokens on your NIMBY bingo card? You don't say. And I can't see even one myself. So, if you are going to make the accusation, at least have the guts to back it up.
We are asking for changes to the project that is all. And the developer will not make one change. Not one. Not even ones that would be of serious advantage to them like moving the exit to the parking. Do you think people who buy these condos are not going to feel like they have been taken in when they can't even exit their own parking lot at peak travel hours? I actually wondered if The City Planning department could be held liable for this and sued by one of the condo owners on this proposed site at a future date for not objecting to the exit at this location when it came across their desks and the data was clear.
As to more housing needed? MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS NEEDED. At least 1000 more condos, not including these ones, are going at our corner over the next five years. Asking that this project be a 7-unit project instead of a 12-unit project won't even put a dent into the number of condos that are going into this area. So that argument about it being such an important addition to the volume of housing by doing 12 units instead of 7 units, has to rate as the most specious argument of all. Sorry, 5 fewer units to save all kinds of quality of life in our neighbourhood is not going to negatively impact anyone who is looking for housing in this area.
Really take that in. 1000 + new condos will be built at the corner of our street in the next 5 years. They are all going to be luxury condos like this project. And most of these condos will be purchased by investors who will rent them back to people at high rates of rent. This city needs more affordable housing. None of this is going to be affordable. It is going to be bought by people who are either very well off or investors who will rent it back for high rates of rent.
https://studiogang.com/project/one-delisle ( 263 Luxury Condos)
https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2019/04/three-tower-mixed-use-complex-proposed-yonge-and-st-clair (best guess is at least 800 Luxury living spaces because the space is literally 6 times the area of the One Delisle so it may be more there is no word yet)
