ANX | 48.07m | 13s | Freed | Teeple Architects

[ShonTron]

Ah, so the slumlords are trying again.

 

[Froggy]

Hi there, first post for me!
I was walking along Dupont this week and noticed that:

View attachment 43632

View attachment 43633

So whoever wants to redevelop this site is back with a new vision for it. It's still massive and pretty tall for the area, though.

 

[ProjectEnd]

It's Freed now (328-358 Dupont Street). Apparently they've submitted for rezoning but I can't find a staff report or any supporting documentation anywhere.

 

[Froggy]

Thanks for the update, @ProjectEnd. Where did you get this info from?

 

[ProjectEnd]

Sign is up on site:

The above file number just leads to the application for 316 Bloor though.

 

[Froggy]

But where does it mention Freed? Is AnX 1 GP, as mentioned on the sign, a code for something?

 

[torontologist]

From a pedestrian/mixed use standpoint, it could be argued that what currently exists on the site is preferable to this.

Anyway, good luck to the developer in their quest to have these reclassified from employment lands... neither the City nor Province is likely to budge.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I believe the city is currently planning to redesignate them themselves, thus the plethora of new proposals along the street recently.

 

[Automation Gallery]

... neither the City nor Province is likely to budge.

What?, they are budging everywhere

 

[ProjectEnd]

But where does it mention Freed? Is AnX 1 GP, as mentioned on the sign, a code for something?

Well there's also this (which also confirms @torontologist's reasonable doubt that an OPA will be met with much joy by the City or the Province):

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2014/pg/comm/communicationfile-48845.pdf

 

[torontologist]

What?, they are budging everywhere

They're not budging south of Eastern (StudioCentres is arguably an exception) or at Keele and Finch. You'd be surprised how strongly certain planners and politicians cling to the idea that manufacturing is going to magically return to these employment lands.

They've shown willingness to convert Core Employment to General Employment, but mixed use is something else entirely.

 

[ProjectEnd]

What?, they are budging everywhere

Examples?

 

[greenleaf]

Community meeting on Oct 25: http://www.joecressy.com/date_change_328_dupont

 

[ADRM]

Community meeting on Oct 25: http://www.joecressy.com/date_change_328_dupont

Cressy's newsletter mentioned streetscape improvements, which are sorely needed for this area. With the huge amount of development planned all along this stretch of Dupont, there is a significant amount of work that needs to be undertaken to make the area much more inviting to and safer for pedestrians.

 

[interchange42]

Joe Cressy put this letter together in November regarding the application:

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...pont_-_community_update_letter.pdf?1479482378

Here's a good chunk of it:

As mentioned above, a settlement was not reached on the appeal at 328 Dupont St. The site is partially located within the Dupont Street Study area, and partially outside of it. City staff have been working hard to ensure that the principles of the Study were protected within the Study area – appropriate heights, rail setbacks to ensure safety, maximizing the public realm, and more – but also to ensure appropriate development on the portion of the site outside of the study area as well.

Discussions with the appellant, through mediation at the OMB, continued throughout the summer. In October, the City received a without prejudice settlement offer from the proponent. As is the case with any without prejudice discussions that occur in the context of pending litigation, the content of these discussions must remain confidential, which means details cannot be made readily available to the local community.

I insisted on holding a without prejudice public meeting to consult with local residents on the settlement offer on October 25, 2016. Although I am not able to discuss the details of the offer, I can say that at the meeting, I heard a number of priorities loud and clear: maintaining appropriate height, preventing overdevelopment of the site, transportation impacts of the proposed settlement, and the need to ensure safe setbacks from the rail corridor to protect those within any future building.

Our City of Toronto Planning and Legal staff who attended the meeting worked hard to consider and take into account the perspectives they heard from the community.

At the November 8th and 9th meeting of City Council, City staff brought forward a report recommending refusal of the settlement offer, which was adopted by City Council. Although I am not able to discuss the reasons for the recommendation to refuse the settlement – as it is legal advice - I agree that the settlement offer did not represent an appropriate proposal, and was not in our community's best interest.

It is likely that the matter will now proceed to a full OMB hearing, although at this time no date has been requested for a hearing. Our City staff will vigorously defend the interests of the community and work to protect our vision for the neighbourhood. I will continue to keep the community updated on the status of the appeal as we move forward.​

The update is that a mediation meeting started yesterday at the OMB, with a tentative date for the decision booked for April 12.

42