Kenojuak
Active Member
Then do it. Write the tribunal and ask to participate in the hearing.
Toronto 175 Cummer | 10.49m | 3s | City of Toronto | Montgomery Sisam
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
Are you a Land use Lawyer or Planner..? We are always looking for Volunteers with those skills.
Msleylar
Active Member
Lets' connect... as long as I am not conflicted on it I'd love to see where I could assist.
torplanner
Active Member
Would be a real shame if, when the residents association loses its frivolous appeal, costs are awarded and the money given to the eventual new tenants of this much needed affordable housing project.
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
THIS project is likely to become a photo-op location on ALL sides of the current Mayoral race...
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
...assuming that this timing & calendar is totally coincidental...?
Kenojuak
Active Member
Local Councillor Lily Cheng now interfering with two motions featuring an exhaustive (and exhausting) list of questions, requests, and direction including for more studies, reports, and significant changes, all of which will undoubtedly result in more delays if adopted by Council.
She is hoping to help kill this project with 1,000 cuts.
She is hoping to help kill this project with 1,000 cuts.
Last edited:
dustcollector
New Member
those are likely questions that simply were not asked when this project was being rammed through without sincere public consultation. when any local residents raised concerns, the prior councillor called them bigots and shut down any discussion. the online virtual community meetings were done by a public relations group headed by Bruce Davis, a former school trustee, which suggests it was a bunch of political insiders working together to suppress democracy.
so, thank you Lily Cheng for upholding democratic values!
dustcollector
New Member
from the report that's linked:
Summary
The proposed modular supportive housing for 175 Cummer Avenue is currently awaiting an Ontario Land Tribunal hearing while the units sit in storage in Owen Sound at a current rate of $77,000 per month. The seniors and surrounding community are anxious to settle the matter sooner than later. During the process of proposing this site, serious gaps occurred, most importantly - a lack of listening and consideration for the 600+ seniors who currently reside on the same property. Therefore, the design and site plan were created without consideration of those most impacted by this decision. Further, the units were ordered without the zoning being firm - resulting in the current situation. This Motion addresses some of their main concerns and provides a way forward. We have commitment from the Bayview Cummer Neighbourhood Association that they will drop the appeal if this Motion is passed. This would create the fastest path to implement the stored units and create housing in a way that is harmonious with the surrounding community.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
I can't fathom what the hell you're on about. It's a 3 storey, 59 unit, supportive housing project. You absolutely are bigoted to oppose it and your 'discussion' deserves nothing more than to be shut down.
Lily can kick rocks, this is absolute garbage.
Northern Light
Superstar
In the first motion, where the Councillor seeks to kill the proposal outright (with a vague commitment to trying to find another site for it in her ward).....
She seeks to have the current site designated parkland.
Of interest, the delay in this project resulted in relocated the modular units, which had already been delivered to the TTC's Finch Parking lot, at a cost of over $300,000, to Owen Sound.
The cost of ongoing storage of the units there is $77,000 per month.
By the time this is over, regardless of the outcome, the relocation and storage costs (and moving the units back to Toronto again) will have added north of $1,500,000 to the budget which could have gone to more housing or another worthwhile cause.
****
The second motion has a lot 'stuff' in it........but the core is essentially a fallback position if the above motion loses, one that would seek to reorganize the modular units on the site, at a undetermined cost, increasing the height of the proposed structure (wonder how that will go over w/the locals?) in order to free up some portion of the site as greenspace/park.
But there are also components seeking to limit the housing access to seniors and preclude any form of harm reduction or people w/addiction issues.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Hahaha. Close the lodge and move the seniors out.
AoD
AoD
Northern Light
Superstar
Keep the seniors; and respect the wishes of the community to keep this site as 'parkland'.
And....expropriate the SFH's across the street and move the modular housing there.
Expensive way to solve the problem, but it kinda appeals to me just the same.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Keep the seniors; and respect the wishes of the community to keep this site as 'parkland'.
And....expropriate the SFH's across the street and move the modular housing there.
Expensive way to solve the problem, but it kinda appeals to me just the same.
Hell, since we are having an affordable housing crisis here in this city - forget about some crummy 3 storey unitized supportive housing. Sell half the land to private developers to fund affordable housing highrise with co-located supportive housing.
AoD
dustcollector
New Member
in reply to ProjectEnd, who had earlier written:
I can't fathom what the hell you're on about. It's a 3 storey, 59 unit, supportive housing project. You absolutely are bigoted to oppose it and your 'discussion' deserves nothing more than to be shut down.
Lily can kick rocks, this is absolute garbage.
it sounds like you just want to dominate and prevail, without reading what's in those reports. they are saying that they want to build this as affordable housing, but with a condition (suggested by the exact institute who the city seems to go to for these things) that it is an abstinence focused housing. there are people trying to quit drugs, and want to reduce exposure to others using drugs, so this site coudl be for them.
honestly, what you wrote is so aggressive and dismissive, it makes it seem you are just totalitarian. is it either totally how you want it, or it's war?
I can't fathom what the hell you're on about. It's a 3 storey, 59 unit, supportive housing project. You absolutely are bigoted to oppose it and your 'discussion' deserves nothing more than to be shut down.
Lily can kick rocks, this is absolute garbage.
it sounds like you just want to dominate and prevail, without reading what's in those reports. they are saying that they want to build this as affordable housing, but with a condition (suggested by the exact institute who the city seems to go to for these things) that it is an abstinence focused housing. there are people trying to quit drugs, and want to reduce exposure to others using drugs, so this site coudl be for them.
honestly, what you wrote is so aggressive and dismissive, it makes it seem you are just totalitarian. is it either totally how you want it, or it's war?