Toronto St Lawrence Condos at 158 Front | 91.44m | 26s | Cityzen | a—A

dcc008:

How is a process democratic when the only individuals involved in the process have a personal interest and therefore a bias in the nature of the proposed project?
Click to expand...

Isn't that the nature of democracy itself?

People don't care about design, they just worry about their views being blocked, and a slightly longer lineup at No Frills...that's the nature of living in a city.
Click to expand...

As much as I disagree with some extremes that one would go to about these issues, those are certainly more valid than arguments put forth by those who had no vested interest other than wanting to see tall towers getting built.

For the record, I am actually for this project, and here is my rationale - I think the neighbourhood has relatively few redevelopable lots left and can use a bit of pushing around the envelopes - adding interest and complexity - without destablizling the whole area.

AG:

i guess some people just live in the past
Click to expand...

If you continue your participation on here with such low quality accusatory statements, what I can guarantee is that you will be living in the past, figuratively speaking.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Automation Gallery said:
OK AoD..whatever you decide
living in the past is not accusatory or an insult, but reality among many people
Click to expand...

Agree with you 100%
..and guess what.. Sometimes I don't agree with you.

I suppose if one is in a position to eliminate individuals whose comments are deemed unsatisfactory than perhaps one should start reviewing about 99% of the posts on this forum, including mine.
Personally, I consider my opinions to have some merit as much as I believe Automation Gallery's opinions do.
To anyone who is reading this, if you feel your comment is a valid one, and not meant as a personal attack, them I certainly hope the threat of a moderator's finger poised over the 'delete' key will not intimidate you from posting it.


And that is my definition of democracy.
 
Granny:

First, the forum isn't a democracy. Second, the said individual has a history of making personal attacks of a similar nature that has been well documented - does Redroom disliking the design (which is a position I happen to disagree with) deserve being labelled as "living in the past"? Just because one's opinion has merit doesn't mean there is a carte blanche to degrade others in the expression of such.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Third:

Let's try to keep the illusion of a (moderated) democracy. It's good for this forum's roots (living in the past I admit), it's good for forum moral, and it's good to keep the forum full of active members = $advertising.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Granny:

First, the forum isn't a democracy. Second, the said individual has a history of making personal attacks of a similar nature that has been well documented - does Redroom disliking the design (which is a position I happen to disagree with) deserve being labelled as "living in the past"? Just because one's opinion has merit doesn't mean there is a carte blanche to degrade others in the expression of such.
Click to expand...
Actually it was not directed at Redroom, but to the ones that expect the same outdated designs to be built over and over...
Regarding personal attacks...sorry there AoD, but i dont know what your talking about, if anything there are the same bunch of snarky rude individuals that dont like anything that i post because of my political views. If you feel ive been a burden to UT, please feel free at anytime to wipe me out of your members list.
 
Last edited:
Looking at the report, I think it's a great design, but in absolutely the wrong location. Had this been proposed for the Entertainment District, I would be all for it (I really like the design per se), but where it is now (the ten-block Old Town of York), it's unacceptable in my opinion, being completely out of character with the rest of the historic district.
 
I love the design, and although can see why some of you think it's out of place in that location, I think it would get by there. Just think of the condos on the n/e and n/w corners of King and Sherbourne. Not quite like this, no, but I think similar enough to meet minimum standards of continuity in the area.
 
Miscreant said:
I love the design, and although can see why some of you think it's out of place in that location, I think it would get by there. Just think of the condos on the n/e and n/w corners of King and Sherbourne. Not quite like this, no, but I think similar enough to meet minimum standards of continuity in the area.
Click to expand...

You might want to read the Staff Report referenced above; many people "love the design" but most agree with the City and the neighbourhood that THIS is not the place for it.
 
The OMB decided to hold a hearing on the appeal of the decision about the temporary parking lot in mid-June (2 days) and then (with the same Board Member so as not to have everything repeated) hold the hearing on the development itself in the second half of October - they are allowing 12 days for this.
 
The applicant has appealed the Zoning Bylaw amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) due to Council's failure to make a decision on the application within the time allotted under Section 34 of the Planning Act.
Click to expand...
:mad: I really hate reading how the City continues to give developers a free pass to OMB.

If Build Toronto and the City were serious about the appropriate density, couldn't the land sale have been done with air rights above 20 floors retained by BT? That this wasn't done gives me the (admittedly possibly uninformed) impression they didn't care THAT much.
 
dowlingm said:
:mad: I really hate reading how the City continues to give developers a free pass to OMB.

If Build Toronto and the City were serious about the appropriate density, couldn't the land sale have been done with air rights above 20 floors retained by BT? That this wasn't done gives me the (admittedly possibly uninformed) impression they didn't care THAT much.
Click to expand...

Your comments reflect those of a NIMBYistic opinion fyi...no place for NIMBY in Toronto these days
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top