Toronto 537 Broadview | 13.13m | 4s | Kanitz Properties | ERA Architects

Hmmm I am good with a ho hum box. Looks energy efficient (we stan dumb boxes!) , economical, and respectful of the older house up front. I don't buy the prevailing aesthetic argument for one minute - maybe the houses looked cohesive at one point, but owner turnover and renovations have resulted in an eclectic streetscape that is varied in material, height and colour (as is the case with many Toronto neighbourhoods)

This will be mainly visible for a few brief moments while walking on Sparkhill - I have no doubt once construction wraps and the landscaping has time to mature you'll barely even notice that it's there.
 
DavidCapizzano said:
Hmmm I am good with a ho hum box. Looks energy efficient (we stan dumb boxes!) , economical, and respectful of the older house up front. I don't buy the prevailing aesthetic argument for one minute - maybe the houses looked cohesive at one point, but owner turnover and renovations have resulted in an eclectic streetscape that is varied in material, height and colour (as is the case with many Toronto neighbourhoods)

This will be mainly visible for a few brief moments while walking on Sparkhill - I have no doubt once construction wraps and the landscaping has time to mature you'll barely even notice that it's there.
Click to expand...

The dark brick will hide the form even more - it defers to everything else around it.

AoD
 
DavidCapizzano said:
Hmmm I am good with a ho hum box. Looks energy efficient (we stan dumb boxes!) , economical, and respectful of the older house up front. I don't buy the prevailing aesthetic argument for one minute - maybe the houses looked cohesive at one point, but owner turnover and renovations have resulted in an eclectic streetscape that is varied in material, height and colour (as is the case with many Toronto neighbourhoods)
Click to expand...

And you are entitled to your preference. But if others differ, you need to be equally accepting of their right to their subjective preference.

We're no longer talking about change or housing, only aesthetics. My take is simply that if there is no extra cost, why not defer to the tastes of those who will look at it every day?

DavidCapizzano said:
This will be mainly visible for a few brief moments while walking on Sparkhill - I have no doubt once construction wraps and the landscaping has time to mature you'll barely even notice that it's there.
Click to expand...

That may well be the case. Although, the very large drive-way makes it a tad more conspicuous; there won't be any landscaping to soften it (at the rear of the property).
 
MBPB said:
Those who have not spent their childhood on this street, or have elderly parents that are still on this street absolutely cannot comprehend the absolute nightmare this will be for us.
Click to expand...
Not sure how I understand how living close to residential construction is an "absolute nightmare" (aren't we basically all doing that in Toronto these days?), but what's your position on the 15 or so people who will now have new homes in the community because this developer is investing in this modest little project? Don't care? Not your problem?

MBPB said:
Having some Goliath company come in and first cause unbearable noise and second, bring down the property value of the homes on Sparkhall is the real problem.
Click to expand...

Goliath company? No, not at all. This is project undertaken by a small business. They do have a facebook page, though: https://www.facebook.com/Kanitz-Properties-Ltd-344046202419171/


MBPB said:
This is not Riverdale. It does not belong in Riverdale.
Click to expand...

Riverdale resident, meet Riverdale:

www.google.com

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.com www.google.com
 


537 Broadview Avenue - Notice of Intention to Designate a Property Under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act

This item will be considered by Toronto Preservation Board on September 1, 2021. It will be considered by City Council on October 1, 2021, subject to the actions of the Toronto Preservation Board.

Summary​
This report recommends that City Council state its intention to designate the listed heritage property at 537 Broadview Avenue, under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

Located in the North Riverdale neighbourhood, on the east side of Broadview Avenue between Bain Avenue and Sparkhall Avenue and overlooking Riverdale Park, the property at 537 Broadview Avenue, contains the residence constructed in 1913 for the Rev. Dr. John McPherson Scott, Presbyterian minister and missionary, and his wife Margaret G. Scott. The two-and-a-half storey, brick-clad, house-form building is a finely-crafted blend of the Queen Anne Revival and Edwardian Classical styles. In 1956, the building was converted to a lodging house, and later a nursing home, and currently contains six dwelling units.

The property at 537 Broadview Avenue was one of three properties on Broadview Avenue which were listed on the City's Heritage Register in 2009 as part of a group associated with the historical development of properties on Broadview Avenue in the Riverdale neighbourhoods north and south of Gerrard Street East.

Following city staff's additional research and evaluation under Ontario Regulation 9/06, the provincial criteria prescribed for municipal designation, it has been determined that the property at 537 Broadview Avenue merits designation under Part IV Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act for its design, associative and contextual value.

An application for Site Plan Control has been submitted for the property that proposes a fourth floor addition to the existing house and a rear, three-storey addition which would increase the number of dwelling units to fifteen inclusive of four rental replacement units. In June 2019, the More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019 (Bill 108) received Royal Assent. Schedule 11 of this Act included amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). The Bill 108 Amendments to the OHA came into force on July 1, 2021, which included a shift in Part IV designations related certain Planning Act applications. Section 29(1.2) of the OHA now restricts City Council's ability to give notice of its intention to designate a property under the OHA to within 90 days after the City Clerk gives notice of a complete application. Applications for Site Plan Control are not subject to Section 29 (1.2).

A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) is required for all development applications that affect listed and designated properties and will be considered when determining how a heritage property is to be conserved. Designation also enables City Council to review proposed alterations or demolitions to the property and enforce heritage property standards and maintenance.​
 
The usual NIMBY neighbourhood freak-out begins... with "STOP THE BOX!"

1631632004754.png
 
Ottawan said:
I have an innovative solution to this sort of NIMBYism. Put a ban "@bell.net" and "@rogers.com" email addresses. They will have no way to organize, as these groups seem unaware of more modern email platforms.
Click to expand...

Ahem, under another guise, I may still use one of those............. LOL
 
Last edited:
Ottawan said:
I have an innovative solution to this sort of NIMBYism. Put a ban "@bell.net" and "@rogers.com" email addresses. They will have no way to organize, as these groups seem unaware of more modern email platforms.
Click to expand...

I deal with a lot of email domains and formatting. "@sympatico.ca" is another old school one, along with "@aol.com" if someone is a Canadian. ;)
 
My parents used a sympatico email until about a year or two ago. I believe it was a paid subscription that was included in their Bell internet package, and only got rid of the email when they moved and switched to Rogers. They are Gmail people now.
 
Yeah, Sympatico was the previous email domain Bell provided for their internet users from a while ago before transitioning to @bell.net. So someone's gotta go way back as a long time customer to still have that. Although, I do still see it once a while.

AOL in Canada is even more antiquated. I had a co-worker who somehow was still a customer for years but had to cut ties after their bandwidth available was insufficient for constant WFH. I was told that the CRTC has stopped them from offering higher speeds after a certain point. So they've been phasing out their presence in Canada for years. They technically haven't shut up shop for good, as they're still operating here but will no longer accept new customers. Supposedly, there's still around 700 or so users remaining in the GTA still with them.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top