khris
Senior Member
Wow, what a bad decision. So the OMB doesn't always do what's best then. I thought they would pass this no problem. Very disappointing, and bad for the area. THey are losing out on an awesome building.
Toronto 1540 Bloor West | 91.9m | 27s | Trinity Group | IBI Group
- Thread starter rdaner
- Start date
waterloowarrior
Senior Member
I dunno, it sounds like the City successfully defended its Avenues plan. Although the whole timeline seems controversial.
re: Transit and being at a major intersection, here's what the board member had to say
re: Transit and being at a major intersection, here's what the board member had to say
adma
Superstar
Actually, they've been fine as artists' lofts now for a good generation or more, and are verging on the last unmolested examples of their sort around these parts. So if you're looking for a "severe retrofit": die, yuppie scum.
(OTOH the old Chairtex factory to the south could use something, because it's not even artist lofts, it's disused.)
casaguy
Senior Member
Having lived near this intersection for many years I have to say that it's one of my least favourite intersections. It's dumpy and uninviting and trapped in the same era as Galleria Mall at Dufferin & Dupont.
TAS offered something modern, iconic and (I think) beautiful to move this intersection forward. The neighbourhood is the real loser here.
Perhaps the city will approve another monstrosity like the Crossways complex or that slab eyesore on the southwest corner. Sad, the lack of foresight here.
--------
OMB decision a victory for opponents of tower
Bloor-Dundas project loses appeal
Anna Mehler Paperny
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Published on Wednesday, Mar. 10, 2010 11:08PM EST
Last updated on Thursday, Mar. 11, 2010 3:34AM EST
Toronto city council has won its latest battle to put the brakes on a proposed 27-storey condo development in the city's west end.
The city has supported increased density in efforts to curb sprawl and make better use of limited land, but it has to be “smart density,” says councillor Gord Perks, who has opposed the Giraffe condo tower in his Parkdale-High Park ward for years.
The Ontario Municipal Board this week dismissed the Giraffe developer's appeal, all but quashing plans for the skyrise condominium building at the busy intersection of Dundas and Bloor.
The proposed building, the OMB decision reads, “is simply too large for the site and inappropriate for the area … and it does not represent good planning.”
The Giraffe development went to the provincial arbitration body in late January after city council voted to oppose it in December. Mazyar Mortazavi, principal of TAS DesignBuild, wouldn't say Wednesday whether he will be appealing the decision or what will happen to people who had already purchased or put deposits down on units that have gone on sale.
“We're declining any comment right now, until we've further reviewed [the ruling] for ourselves,” he said.
Mr. Mortazavi, whose company has won accolades for its innovative and eco-friendly modern designs, has for years touted Giraffe as a building in the same vein.
The decision is a victory not only for the city but for residents like Hilary Bell, who have been fighting to trim down the development.
“It's a very awkward space and we were concerned about the amount of traffic and problems with impeding pedestrians along the sidewalk there, which is quite narrow,” she said. “It would have created a very unpleasant sidewalk environment.”
Ms. Bell said she hopes an avenue study completed late last year, which set out detailed plans for what the city and residents want development in the area to look like, will make processes like this easier. The Giraffe's proponents originally argued the study, completed long after they submitted their proposal, shouldn't apply in this case.
By dismissing both this argument, and the reasoning that the Giraffe's proximity to a major intersection and TTC station should merit higher density than otherwise permitted, the OMB decision sets an important precedent, Mr. Perks said.
“We are arguing that you can have appropriate intensification. But you can't crush neighbourhoods,” he said. “It's a game-changer right across the city: It says to developers, ‘You can't take the big-buck, easy-way, cookie-cutter development and throw a condo tower on every corner. You actually have to think about the neighbourhood where you're building.'”
TAS offered something modern, iconic and (I think) beautiful to move this intersection forward. The neighbourhood is the real loser here.
Perhaps the city will approve another monstrosity like the Crossways complex or that slab eyesore on the southwest corner. Sad, the lack of foresight here.
--------
OMB decision a victory for opponents of tower
Bloor-Dundas project loses appeal
Anna Mehler Paperny
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Published on Wednesday, Mar. 10, 2010 11:08PM EST
Last updated on Thursday, Mar. 11, 2010 3:34AM EST
Toronto city council has won its latest battle to put the brakes on a proposed 27-storey condo development in the city's west end.
The city has supported increased density in efforts to curb sprawl and make better use of limited land, but it has to be “smart density,” says councillor Gord Perks, who has opposed the Giraffe condo tower in his Parkdale-High Park ward for years.
The Ontario Municipal Board this week dismissed the Giraffe developer's appeal, all but quashing plans for the skyrise condominium building at the busy intersection of Dundas and Bloor.
The proposed building, the OMB decision reads, “is simply too large for the site and inappropriate for the area … and it does not represent good planning.”
The Giraffe development went to the provincial arbitration body in late January after city council voted to oppose it in December. Mazyar Mortazavi, principal of TAS DesignBuild, wouldn't say Wednesday whether he will be appealing the decision or what will happen to people who had already purchased or put deposits down on units that have gone on sale.
“We're declining any comment right now, until we've further reviewed [the ruling] for ourselves,” he said.
Mr. Mortazavi, whose company has won accolades for its innovative and eco-friendly modern designs, has for years touted Giraffe as a building in the same vein.
The decision is a victory not only for the city but for residents like Hilary Bell, who have been fighting to trim down the development.
“It's a very awkward space and we were concerned about the amount of traffic and problems with impeding pedestrians along the sidewalk there, which is quite narrow,” she said. “It would have created a very unpleasant sidewalk environment.”
Ms. Bell said she hopes an avenue study completed late last year, which set out detailed plans for what the city and residents want development in the area to look like, will make processes like this easier. The Giraffe's proponents originally argued the study, completed long after they submitted their proposal, shouldn't apply in this case.
By dismissing both this argument, and the reasoning that the Giraffe's proximity to a major intersection and TTC station should merit higher density than otherwise permitted, the OMB decision sets an important precedent, Mr. Perks said.
“We are arguing that you can have appropriate intensification. But you can't crush neighbourhoods,” he said. “It's a game-changer right across the city: It says to developers, ‘You can't take the big-buck, easy-way, cookie-cutter development and throw a condo tower on every corner. You actually have to think about the neighbourhood where you're building.'”
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
That was unexpected, and I don't see why this proposal shouldn't fly provided that a plan to "manage" the transition in scale exist for densification of the node. Between this and Theatre Park, I'd say this one has far greater planning merit.
AoD
AoD
Automation Gallery
Superstar
This represents a huge victory for all the community members who put so much volunteer time into opposing this development - you know who you are. I think we might want to organize a little event to celebrate and acknowledge some local heros. I'll be in touch with more on that soon.
Gord Perks
So sad........Calling people that opposed this project, local heroes.
Gord Perks
So sad........Calling people that opposed this project, local heroes.
urbandreamer
recession proof
^We're going to a local strip club to celebrate! Apparently the TAS guys will be praying next door at the church.
milanista
Active Member
The corner isn't totally a black eye? The building on the southwest corner is atrocious. Crossways isn't pretty either. Just south of the intersection lies the ugly power centre before power centres were invented Loblaws/Coffee Time/Firestone/huge parking lot complex. To each their own, but if you ask me it's a dark and unappealing corner and I'm a person that actually wanted to live here. Ugh.
I accept your praise of Joe Mercury's and agree that any neighbourhood spot is a good spot. But it's gone, and i doubt cancelling Giraffe is going to bring it back.
It will not be possible for any project to make a profit here, at least as a condo building, under the 18 storey mark. Don't you think that if TAS had the ability to make a profit at 15 stories or less they would have settled for that instead of now wasting a mountain of time and money and having to either scrap the whole thing and recalibrate or sell (likely at a loss)? The economics of a 10-12 storey condo here simply do not work unless it is in the $500+ per square foot range and there really is no way around that. Giraffe was willing to go down to 20 storeys and they have been budgeting for that height since I bought back in August. They went from 27, to 25, to 20 stories so it's not like they didn't already give it more than a shot by cutting their profit margin. Let's not forget that they cut their prices drastically in mid 2009 by about 20% per unit on average. Nobody builds something to break even my friend. We can talk about fitting in with the neighbourhood and speaking to the corner and its surroundings until we're blue in the face. But if it isn't feasible, nothing else really matters.
I love the quote in that article above about cookie-cutter condos lol. Spoken like a person who is truly out of touch with the issue. Giraffe is anything but cookie cutter.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
simuls
Senior Member
Clearly you've never read any of my other posts, as I'm an artist myself (although I hate that term - too loaded). Those buildings looked to be pretty much dilapidated and while there were a few signs of life they look like they're not in good shape. You'll note I didn't suggest them NOT being artists lofts, but just looking better - plus, add in some retail to bring the pedestrians north and integrate a cool area a bit more. I suggest this because they're exactly the type of building I'd love to live in!
While I'm no socialist, maybe that's the problem with so many developers today. What's wrong with creating a project that meets all of it financial goals including providing employment, etc, without making a huge profit? The fact is that building is cheaper now than it was 4 years ago (and will become even more so as all the cranes disappear over the next year throwing 1000's of construction workers back into the job search) and 4 years ago prices were in the $350/ft range downtown and $250/range in this area. You could easily make money here at a $300/ft price point. Not tons, but enough to pay everybody well and a little extra to keep growing your company. We need some developers in this city that aren't so greedy.
AnnetteMeetsJane
Active Member
I admit that I am thrilled by this decision. If TAS had got permission to build 20 storeys on a small lot at Bloor and Dundas W, it is clear that 20+ storey lumps would be thrown up on all the corners along all the Avenues. 2500 Bloor (Bloor and Jane) would be unstoppable at 18 stories. I would not have been surprised if Tridel didn't try to increase the height of their proposed buildings @ 2500 Bloor to match Giraffe. Just for once - hooray for the OMB.
Density at transit points is all well and good, but there are already established communities in development locations. Most of the value of these development parcels comes from the desirability of the communities that surround them. The argument that the communities along Avenues should have to put up with any old unsuitable development foisted on them so the developers can make a profit versus face no development at all is ridiculous - a parking lot holds promise for the future, a community is condemned to put up with unsuitable buildings until they fall down. Where one developer saw potential, so too will others - hopefully ones with a different business model.
AmJ
Density at transit points is all well and good, but there are already established communities in development locations. Most of the value of these development parcels comes from the desirability of the communities that surround them. The argument that the communities along Avenues should have to put up with any old unsuitable development foisted on them so the developers can make a profit versus face no development at all is ridiculous - a parking lot holds promise for the future, a community is condemned to put up with unsuitable buildings until they fall down. Where one developer saw potential, so too will others - hopefully ones with a different business model.
AmJ
khris
Senior Member
So what is the chances of this building being built at a different location?
detroitbootybass
Active Member
What a terrible decision...
CN Tower
Banned
What do you think the total construction costs are here including land simuls?
Irishmonk
Senior Member
Congratulations Nimbies for killing an architectural masterpiece. The loss to your neighbourhood in real estate value and positive recognition is immense. Talk about cutting your nose to spite your face.