News   Jul 15, 2024
 483     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 589     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 2.1K     1 

Toronto Ridiculous NIMBYism thread

What's weird is how they want the garage entrances off Bloor instead of through the alley. Wouldn't having them off Bloor be worse for traffic?
The person running the petition has a property that backs onto the alley. But that's probably just a coincidence.

Regardless, can you imagine the devastation that will be caused by an extra couple of hundred consumers living within walking distance of Bloor St. stores? Maybe they'll need to open more restaurants and services instead of yet another nail bar.
 
What makes me LOL the most about that particular set of complaints is the fear of "a decade of construction". As someone who works in custom residential construction I don't mind telling ya that these bougie neighbourhoods are in a permanent state of construction, never mind a decade.
 
Even creating an overhang.

IMG_1858.jpg

Your picture of a couple of young dudes sitting and smoking just gave some middle class stay-at-home mom a heart attack. No to overhangs destroying our neighbourhood!
 
What makes me LOL the most about that particular set of complaints is the fear of "a decade of construction". As someone who works in custom residential construction I don't mind telling ya that these bougie neighbourhoods are in a permanent state of construction, never mind a decade.
And yet the main argument is whether to keep the six storey cap or allow 8. That's a valid discussion to have but won't make any difference about the amount of construction or the impact of a busier street life.
 
Hence why they should toss their worry about construction so I can take them seriously.
I could maybe agree with them on the height changes but the way they frame their argument is......um, offputting.
 
Hence why they should toss their worry about construction so I can take them seriously.
I could maybe agree with them on the height changes but the way they frame their argument is......um, offputting.
You have to print it double spaced so you can read between the lines. They might as well just come out and say that people moving in need to support "Kingsway values"
 
Throw in plans for a homeless shelter (that area is woefully undersupplied) and a safe injection site and pull up a chair and a bottle of wine because the moral indignation is about to get Black Books levels of hilarious.
 
While this article may not be NIMBY in nature, it shows us that the "blue laws" in Toronto are still here. Having fun is frowned upon by the city.

See link.

Toronto might pull the plug on famous holiday light display

Around Halloween and Christmas, Karin Martin and her family decorate their house on Glen Lake Avenue to the nines - it's one of the most well-known holiday houses in the city.

Last week, Martin called the 3-1-1 help line because some city-owned trees by her property were damaged after last week's mini ice storm.

However, she says when a member of city's urban forestry staff arrived the next day, he told her to remove a swing from one the trees, a swing Martin says had been there for 20 years.

The following morning, as Martin recalls, the city staff came back and cut out the tree swing and also removed three Christmas lights from a different tree.

She tells us they didn't deal with the ice-related damage and claims the staff member who had been by the previous day threatened her with a fine if she ever put up Christmas lights in the tree again.

“We have people that come here and they even offer us money, which we don’t take, towards hydro bills and all kinds of stuff, and I got this one guy who’s probably going to kibosh the entire thing because he has told us he will fine us if we put lights up,” she says.

Matthew Cutler, a spokesperson from the city's Parks, Forestry and Recreation department, confirms that city staff made two visits to the property on Glen Lake Avenue and removed the swing.

He says in order to prevent damage, in general the city doesn't permit items such as swings and Christmas lights in city-owned trees. There are some special exception for Christmas, for instance if a BIA wants to put lights of street-side trees and assumes responsibility for any potential damage.

Further, he explains, "We can’t do repairs, or we can’t do pruning or maintenance on a tree with Christmas lights in it because it’s obviously a hazard to us having electrified Christmas lights in the tree and doing the work."

The city doesn't have the resources to regularly check up on each on every one of its trees - it only sees them on a rotation once every few years.

When asked whether the city would check back on the Christmas light-filled tree on Glen Lake, Cutler says this would likely happen only if they received a complaint.

“We don’t keep a list of places to check back up on in that way, so this goes back into our regular rotation," he says.

"But if we had to go out to do maintenance again or we had a complaint, perhaps from a neighbour, or someone, that they felt the tree was potentially being injured, then we would inspect from there."
 
What the hell is happening here in central Etobicoke

https://twitter.com/GraphicMatt/status/837331101496524801

Matt Elliott‏Verified account@GraphicMatt
Don’t see this much anymore. Etobicoke York Council approves dev of 53 detached three-storey homes on cul-de-sacs.
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/ey/bgrd/backgroundfile-101123.pdf

C57MMOZVMAEn0Hw.jpg


Matt Elliott‏Verified account@GraphicMatt 1h1 hour ago
Original plan called for townhouses but, well, you can guess the rest of the story.

C57M5UzU8AEgeKp.jpg

C57M5Y7U0AEYAZW.jpg


Matt Elliott‏Verified account@GraphicMatt 1h1 hour ago
(Per the developer, they will start at $1.4 million each.)

"They" referring to the single-detached homes, that were originally twice as many townhouses.

This city sometimes, jeez.... I am shocked the developer didn't go directly to the OMB. Maybe they did the math and found they could make more money from single-detached going at $1.4m over townhouses at 600k a piece.

I look forward to the UrbanToronto article.
 
At least they mentioned it's within one block of High Park and Keele. Case closed. If not doubling the density there, double it where?

Of course, the irony is that this particular apartment neighbourhood was strongly opposed by local NIMBY during its' time.

AoD
 
Announce that some of the condos will be TCHC stock and really watch the pearl clutching
its easy to say when its not your neighbourhood. Now I do not live anywhere in or near the kingsway. I was driivng through a street wast of dufferin and saw these signs on lawns stating :keep stacked townhouses" out of our neighbourhoods". I saw the name of the community association, got home and went online. I figured it was due to the stacked townhouses near Lawrence West subway (though why this area gets townhouses and then further away from a subway there is that massive condo development at dufferin and lawrence makes no sense).

The website shows 2 developments on their street and for one, no details are provided just the address. I googled the address and it appears 5 detached houses are involved. So I presume stacked townhouses. Stacked townhouses are not family friendly places to lives and what I mean by that is the way they are designed with all those stairs. I have seen others state the very same thing and these are people in the housing industry. Another thing is how having these stacked townhouses changes the look of the street. We have all seen this on streets where you have detached houses and then at the end of the street or beginning, townhouses (though not stacked) done in stucco when the rest of the houses are brick. It does not blend in. The other reason people are against stacked townhouses is because these units will be made small and really are for investors and most will be rental and as long as investors get paid do not care what the people living in them do. This is not going on in my neighbourhood but trust me I would against this to. I prefer low rise condos (5 storey) on a main street not in inner residential streets
 
At least they mentioned it's within one block of High Park and Keele. Case closed. If not doubling the density there, double it where?

Of course, the irony is that this particular apartment neighbourhood was strongly opposed by local NIMBY during its' time.

AoD
I don't blame them. Besides, why should all those tree be cut also. I thought the city was so strict on this. You hear people always say just to get the city to agree to have a tree cut on their property is a nightmare.

It was insane how those apartment buildings got built on High Park in the first place when the rest of the street has houses. I could only imagine the beautiful houses that had to come down for those ugly buildings

Boy I can;t wait until the condo meltdown happens
 

Back
Top