Toronto 4670 Dundas Street West | 24.5m | 6s | Initial Corporation | Kirkor
- Thread starter PMT
- Start date
artyboy123
Senior Member
I quickly glanced over at the cover letter provided in the submitted documentation!
Here are the 2 that stood out to me in the map and table format!
Here are the 2 that stood out to me in the map and table format!
artyboy123
Senior Member
@Northern Light @AlbertC, hope to see your comments soon!
First things first — the site is zoned “Neighbourhood,” which currently means single-family homes. Any attempt to redevelop will likely face significant pushback from surrounding residents.
Also, I noticed there are 6 visitor parking spots and zero residential parking, which seems questionable given how car-dependent the area is. It’s near the edge of Etobicoke, and the closest TTC station (Islington) is still about a 15-minute walk away, with few nearby shops or amenities for daily needs.
Just my two cents!
Northern Light
Superstar
Sure, except Dundas is a 'Major Street' here which means 6s is now as-of-right.
Hence, this is Site Plan Application, not a zoning change.
As such, this does not require Council Approval.
That does not mean residents couldn't influence the Councillor, who can in turn affect the application. ....but residents here have no overt veto tool.
That could be an issue raised by staff...........though, its 121M from the nearest bus stop, 400m to Islington and about 1km, as you note, to Islington Stn.
But as there are no parking minimums in the by-law anymore..... I'm not sure how much weight that argument will be given by planning.
Looking at this as structured, I would think the potential sore points would be the loading zone with Waste Management. They are below the 60 unit guidance to require it from Planning, but WM holds something of a de facto veto.
I parking issue could be a sore point if Transportation doesn't believe the transportation impact study.
The height lacks precedent, but that's pretty much a non-issue if you have as-of-right. They are actually asking for 0.5M over in metric height, but if staff though that made this a ZBA the applicant would have been told.
Its a pretty nice looking proposal. It would be an easier 'sell' to the neighbours at 4s, but that is likely moot. This is in the hands of staff.
toaster29
Active Member
Are they proposing removing the trees that line Dundas here? It's a nice tree-lined avenue that is very pleasant looking, hope they are staying. 121m to the nearest bus stop is a little bit of a joke, the 40 is one of handful of routes that actually decreased in frequency this year, totally unreliable route, but walking to Islington (to then take a bus to get to Islington Station) would be doable, still not ideal for this area to not have a vehicle.
Towered
Superstar
I'd love to see all the houses along this part of Dundas replaced.
Northern Light
Superstar
The proposal retains 2 of the existing trees facing Dundas, the Sugar Maple, and Honey Locust.
It removes 5 trees on the Dundas site, 2 European Ash, 2 Northern Catalpa and a European Horsechestnut, largely due to being in conflict w/the proposed driveway location, or the roots are anyway.
They propose 2 new trees on the Dundas frontage, (they say more, but I am not counting Serviceberry) with 1 being a Bur Oak (good choice) and one being a Tulip Tree (questionable)
In terms of the balance of the property, they propose removing seven other trees, and saving more than 20. *
(some of the trees are on neighbouring properties; as the arborist/LA will look at anything that might be in the way.)
A Torontonian Now
Senior Member
I am so pleasantly surprised to see the Major Street changes showing such early fruit.
In terms of parking minimums and transit at the site, my take is that this is going to nearly certainly be a rental tenure building, and the people who rent here will do so knowing the location and lack of parking. Over time, if this leads to increased usage of local routes, perhaps transit frequencies will increase to meet the demand. But regardless, lack of parking is not a reason to oppose as the residents who choose to rent here will not need it.
Perhaps the parking & transit situation will be so poor that it places downwards pressure on the rent that can be charged. If so, that is a developer/building owner problem, not a planning one.
Honestly, I'd rather have ten similar proposals to this one, each 6-stories with 58 units, line this stretch of Dundas over having a single point tower at Dundas/Islington that is 60 stories with 580 units. The 10 Major Street apartments will be less environmentally damaging to build (more wood, less concrete), and a more livable built form for the residents.
For the first time in as long as I can remember, there is potential to meaningfully densify our city in a better way.
In terms of parking minimums and transit at the site, my take is that this is going to nearly certainly be a rental tenure building, and the people who rent here will do so knowing the location and lack of parking. Over time, if this leads to increased usage of local routes, perhaps transit frequencies will increase to meet the demand. But regardless, lack of parking is not a reason to oppose as the residents who choose to rent here will not need it.
Perhaps the parking & transit situation will be so poor that it places downwards pressure on the rent that can be charged. If so, that is a developer/building owner problem, not a planning one.
Honestly, I'd rather have ten similar proposals to this one, each 6-stories with 58 units, line this stretch of Dundas over having a single point tower at Dundas/Islington that is 60 stories with 580 units. The 10 Major Street apartments will be less environmentally damaging to build (more wood, less concrete), and a more livable built form for the residents.
For the first time in as long as I can remember, there is potential to meaningfully densify our city in a better way.