I really dont know. The developer of BOB held on to large swaths of land around here for years and years without suffering any pain that I am aware of and Gliden who has a tentative deal to sell 371 Wallace (north side) sat on that land for 15 years before deciding to sell it. Property owners can carry a loss and hold land a long time; or at least until the political winds change. Right now many land owners in our area are waiting for the (poorly conceived) Employment Lands zoning by-law to come up for renewal. They are betting it will be changed or scrapped altogether. I have talked about it here before but nobody is going to build a new factory at 371 Wallace in a congested city were costs including wages are higher. It would make more sense to have a mix of residential and business including some live/work space for designers/photographers/etc (who wont need to drive to work) or software firms and of course the developer would make more money. I would guess that the new owner of 371 Wallace is going to wait it out. The overall point is that developers can out wait politicians and residents and if they cant they sell to another developer.
The corner of Bloor and Dundas is very valuable especially as the entire area is going through a revival. Don't underestimate how things like the new LCBO south of the corner or the future airport link/GO station, or Railpath stage 2 will make this a desirable spot. There will be a lot of pressures to intensify that corner coming from the real estate market and the province (who see intensification as part of their green belt strategy).
Predictions....hmmmm. I don't think this is over. I think that given Steven Teeples record of bold designs I could see TAZ quietly buying up a few more properties and sweetening the pot by incorporating the cash starved TTC (Dundas West) into their plans. It would be hard to say no to a plan that benefits the TTC and transit in general. A few more properties would solve their access problems. Even if a new developer buys it there will still be access issues so I tend to think whoever has that corner will go big.I also think (hope) that the south west corner, one of the ugliest in the city, looks prime for a tear down and intensification of some sort. I agree with Hilary that the east side of Dundas is the new gateway to the Junction and will be developed (I feel) rapidly. I wonder if Price Chopper owns the land to the south where the used car place is.
There are many places in this city where people will spend 800,000 dollars to live in a house next to a tall building such as the Yonge/Eglington and High Park as examples. And those are residential side streets like Erskine and Broadway Avenues and Pacific and Quebec respectively. Nobody has lost money owning one of those homes.You are seeing intensification along Bloor at Highpark and at Bloor and Keele. The number of stories for the Giraffe is consistent with other intensification along Bloor and with existing examples I have mentioned. The old way of thinking with tall buildings in giant open spaces such as seen in East Toronto has been discredited and they are now filling in those spaces with low to mid height build form. I sure would love to see some new life at Bloor and Perth, near my home.
This topic came up at a recent ARC meeting and it was said that there are not enough children to offer this program elsewhere. I think the real issue is teachers. I struggled with putting my daughter in French Immersion as well but in the end she stayed at her school because I liked being a part of its community.
Hillary, the only place where the word NIMBY appears was in your letter.
I agree with you on some points and I also think that some people have opposed this for the wrong reasons whether it be self-interest, fear, or resistance to change.You may not like that but maybe being removed a bit gives some sense of context that being in the middle doesn't.
You have more faith in official plans and by-laws than most. Explain how 351 Wallace got built in violation of the OP. The City caved is how it got built because at the end of the day they did not want to spend money at the OMB fighting the wharehousing of people but instead wanted to fight tall buildings at transit hubs. Show me how this proves the system works. Lets see if the money train continues as developer after developer appeals for exemptions in our general area and they will. Why, because the vacant land or properties that could be redeveloped are too valuable. Our provincial government is about to drop a few billion dollars partially in our area creating a transit hub at Bloor and links up at St. Clair which will create even greater pressure for intensification in the surrounding area. Who runs the OMB ? Put two and two together. Throw in a city that is desperate for cash and we will see how strong these by-laws are.
In terms of Gord Perks, his comments to some extent were idiotic populist pap. You can say whatever you want about the Giraffe but "cookie cutter condo" is not one of them unless you want to play to the home crowd. Reviews of the building from a design point of view were unanimously filled with praise for originality. I thought Gord was above pandering but not so.
There are many people like your self who have informed views on this issue and I know that we agree on some things and dont on others but I have great respect for all the hours and research you have done. I can also say that I have talked to some residents in the area who were running around with their heads cut off like the Giraffe was the end of civilization as we know it seemingly with no knowledge of how much better the west end is from what it was even 20 years ago. I had to sit and listen to people lecture me about how bad the Giraffe would be when I know that they havent got out of their car and walked anywhere in their hood for years and never shop in the area and dont know anything about the history of the area. Maybe the Bloor stretch would not be DEAD (or at least more alive) if they cared as much about it as suddenly they have: People who didnt care about Metrolinx and how that will physically affect the area and their precious home prices and instead got all ruddy faced about one tall building that will probably do more to revive that corner and create green living than anything that has happened on that corner in 40 years. More than a few said they were against it because they did not like the way it looked.
There are tall buildings next to homes at Kipling and Islington and they seem to be ok. There is more street life there than ever. At 6 points there is a major redevelopment, probably more to your liking but they have the space. Intensification in the more downtown areas requires that you build up, there is no other solution and being near transit hubs makes all the sense in the world. Its the way things are going to go and would be better to embrace it and work with it than fear it.
I want to save a special section for the Crossways: it doesnt mean anything except how not to develop a corner. The setback that people talk about actually works against the building, corralling it off from the streetscape and making sure that it is never integrated with the community. Setbacks on dense properties are bad for busy urban corners. The Crossways proves this.
I agree with you about access and I think the developer made a tactical and design error by not buying at least two more properties but many people who went to the meetings had no problem with the actual design or height. They were drowned out. On the east side we have seen how even a boring building like BeBloor is bringing life to a very neglected strip of town and most people in our area would welcome the intensification and life that something like Giraffe could bring to Bloor. Its only a matter of time before the houses along Bloor, many already with that waiting for development look, are redeveloped and there will be many views on that but most people I have talked with welcome it including tall buildings. At the end of the day I personally believe that tall building should be built to intensify street corners near transit hubs and that it is the green and responsible thing to do while bringing life to a street. Everything I have seen and read tells me this is the today, tomorrow, and future of cities.
Nice to think this would be a possibility. My daughter is in Grade 1 and has been attending Regal Road in the FI program since SK. She is loving it there, and we as parents like the school very much. What we miss most, however, is having the school close by and feeling that we are part of the community in which she goes to school. She attended Perth during JK, and it was wonderful to walk back and forth with her and to get to know our neighbours and other parents. For anyone contemplating this decision, I would definitely add this to everything you have to mull. Personally (though I can say so many great things about Regal Road and FI in general) I feel it is a lot to give up, sending your child outside the neighbourhood. It would be great for families to have the option of schooling here in the Junction Triangle AND choosing French Immersion.
Having represented the West Bend Community Association on the LAC for the Avenue Study, I don't really understand the postings here about residents being motivated by NIMBY-ism and fear of change. Throughout the process, from the Bloor Visioning workshops to the OMB hearing itself, I would say the majority of residents support intensification around Bloor-Dundas. No-one really thinks that the strip malls (Midas, 7/11) and parking-focused sites (Shoppers/Price Chopper, Loblaws/Zellers) on Bloor and Dundas are defensible or desirable. We all know they will be intensified and that's a good thing.
Given that understanding, there is room for legitimate disagreement over what built form should be used to achieve intensification. Should density be piled up on a few corners (as in The Crossways Complex and the Giraffe proposal) or should it be distributed more evenly across many sites? In the Official Plan, in place as a defining policy document for about 10 years now, the Avenues (including Bloor and Dundas) are targeted for intensification through a mainly mid-rise built form (the distributed density model), while the Downtown and the three Centres accommodate tall buildings (the more concentrated density model). One may disagree with the OP but this isn't a new concept; yet the developer decided to take on the OP and the Planning Department, instead of coming in with a project that would be a better fit for this tight site. Obviously, they thought they could make a case, but on the evidence presented at the hearing, their case proved to be much weaker than the city's case and they lost. Given the weight of evidence, it would have been surprising if the verdict had gone the other way.
No-one who lives in the neighbourhood can be happy that we will have to live with what may be a derelict site for some time to come but approving this application - which, I must point out, was also an appeal against the new Avenue By-law - would have undermined the intent of the by-law across the entire study area. During the hearing, we heard for the first time that the owner of the Shoppers/Price Chopper site had come in with a concept for two tall (20+-storeys) towers. If the Giraffe appeal had been successful, I'm sure this application would have come back, citing the Giraffe precedent, and other applications for other sites may well have followed. For developers and for residents, having a new by-law with as-of-right zoning provides a more stable development environment. Everyone knows what's allowed and we don't have to go on a site-by-site basis. That doesn't mean that developers won't ask for variances here and there but we expect to see less of that.
I was at all the meetings. There were people for it but the NIMBY's far outnumbered others so I did not go to the design charette. I would repeat though that there were people (including me) who had some very valid concerns about access. For me the actual building was the best point.
We would like to put a shout out to any green thumbs who would like to help out this year with the community garden at the corner of Symington Ave. and Rankin Cres. We meet every Sunday morning at 10:00 am. We will be starting up again probably by late April. I will notify everyone before then. We are also always happy to take seedlings and plants to add to the garden. Donations are welcome. Hope you can help.
Check out this amusing poster I saw on the Railpath yesterday. It's a fun way to remind people to keep the Railpath tidy, right down to the smallest pebble. :)
Not Far From the Tree picks fruit from trees that would otherwise go to waste. They help fruit tree owners make use of the abundance of fruit that their trees offer by dispatching teams of volunteers to harvest it for them. One third goes to the fruit tree owners, another third goes to the volunteers for their labour, and the final third is distributed (by bicycle or cart) to community organizations in the neighbourhood who can make good use of the fresh fruit.
perks is just another politician who doesn't want to upset the voters. maybe his stance would've been difference if it was dec 2010, and already re-ected.
why does this neighbourhood oppose everything? why do residents feel the need work against the planning process, instead of with it?
well, good luck with that corner...maybe another coffee time or payday loan store can open up and you'll all be happy.
There are some better views of that gazebo in these photos: here and here. Maybe I'll post then'n'now for those ones someday too.
Or imagine having Google Streetview available for dates in the past? In the future, I wonder if Google will make older versions of Streetview available for browsing.
An interesting note is that in the old photo is a gazebo tram stop and today there is the Railpath map and starting point. Sometimes I would give anything to go back for one day and walk up from Dowling Ave. in my long time home of Parkdale all the way up Sorauren and then Sterling and Perth to where I live today; to see (and smell!) it all and meet a few folks who shaped my community today.
The planning meetings do not exactly attract a representative cross section of the community. People who hate proposed changes are far more motivated to show up. Even then, many people at the meetings about the Giraffe project have been supportive.
We will see what happens but I hope we don't end up watching the existing building decay. The FODB used the building on the South West corner as a positive example but I think it has to be the ugliest building in the city - probably in the universe.
When you manage to get a good architect working on a project, it makes sense to me to show some respect for that.
I like the challenge of using up leftovers in my fridge and coming up with something new to nosh on. Frugal can be yummy.
This morning, I cobbled together this breakfast:
Yes, it would be great if people came out to this meeting, but not this Monday, unless they want to get a really good seat early. The meeting is on March 22, a week after this Monday, March 15.
We really need to show the City, and Metrolinx, that people are concerned with this issue by showing up for this meeting. Its a rare chance to show them that we have not forgotten the issue.
"‘You can't take the big-buck, easy-way, cookie-cutter development and throw a condo tower on every corner. You actually have to think about the neighbourhood where you're building.'” Says Perks.
Giraffe was hardly a fast buck cookie cutter condo, it was 100% the opposite. Perks is playing the populist here as many people didnt like the building because it wasnt a bland cookie cutter condo like the one at Glen Lake. There used to be metal foundries only a few years ago along Dundas that spewed dangerous fumes and people still lived there. I guess that was not as scary as a new condo at a transit hub. And nobody seems to complain about the Shoppers with the giant parking lot that attracts tons of car traffic to the area. Funny how selective people can be about what is good planning.
Hilary Bells concerns are good ones and I dont understand why the developer didnt buy one more building to give them more room; it seems so obvious. I agree there has to be a way for a high quality game changing development to happen at that corner. If the Giraffe wants to move a bit east I would welcome it.
Michael and Shelley have expanded the menu offerings at Boo Radley's to include voting in the second (and final) round of the Fuzzy Boundaries naming project. Boo Radley's is at 1482 Dupont Street and you can find a ballot box and ballots on the ledge right across from the long bar.
I am really disappointed that they wouldn't at least offer some sort of variance that would approve a reasonable height; reasonable being one that would not negatively impact the character of the intersection & community, but one that would still make the the site attractive to the developer.
Why is it always a conversation about what doesn't work rather than what could work?
As always I find myself not agreeing with the OMB. Corners of major intersections near TTC and a future transit GO hub is exactly where tall buildings should go.
I would agree that it was too high and there were serious traffic/walker issues with the entrance but I hope they dont walk away or sell off so we get a fourth ugly building on that corner. That area needs some energy and revitalization.
Some will call this a victory but I may turn out to be a hollow one.
Excellent news, we won at the OMB for 1540 Bloor Street West! Here is the summary of the decision:
"In the final analysis, the proposed structure of 92.5 metres in height at over 16
times coverage is simply too large for the site and inappropriate for the area. In my
opinion, it is not consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Avenue Study,
it does not conform with the City OP and it does not represent good planning.
Based on all of the foregoing therefore, the proposed development is not
approved and accordingly, the Developer's appeal is dismissed."
This represents a huge victory for all the community members who put so much volunteer time into opposing this development - you know who you are. I think we might want to organize a little event to celebrate and acknowledge some local heros. I'll be in touch with more on that soon.
On Sunday, March 14, beginning at 1 p.m., Fuzzy Boundaries will be bringing music to the streets of our neighbourhood to encourage people to vote before the polls close (online until midnight) and celebrate the end of the naming project.
There are three ways to enjoy the music of the Baturyn Concert Marching Band. A musical parade will be passing by a majority of the houses in the neighbourhood (route map: http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=3469062). You can see the band go by twice at Perth Park. Or, you can take a walk through the neighbourhood with us as the band plays on.
More details will follow (and a better map when our over-worked web guy gets a moment), but we hope that you will tell your friends about this special event in our neighbourhood.
I really dont know. The developer of BOB held on to large swaths of land around here for years and years without suffering any pain that I am aware of and Gliden who has a tentative deal to sell 371 Wallace (north side) sat on that land for 15 years before deciding to sell it. Property owners can carry a loss and hold land a long time; or at least until the political winds change. Right now many land owners in our area are waiting for the (poorly conceived) Employment Lands zoning by-law to come up for renewal. They are betting it will be changed or scrapped altogether. I have talked about it here before but nobody is going to build a new factory at 371 Wallace in a congested city were costs including wages are higher. It would make more sense to have a mix of residential and business including some live/work space for designers/photographers/etc (who wont need to drive to work) or software firms and of course the developer would make more money. I would guess that the new owner of 371 Wallace is going to wait it out. The overall point is that developers can out wait politicians and residents and if they cant they sell to another developer.
The corner of Bloor and Dundas is very valuable especially as the entire area is going through a revival. Don't underestimate how things like the new LCBO south of the corner or the future airport link/GO station, or Railpath stage 2 will make this a desirable spot. There will be a lot of pressures to intensify that corner coming from the real estate market and the province (who see intensification as part of their green belt strategy).
Predictions....hmmmm. I don't think this is over. I think that given Steven Teeples record of bold designs I could see TAZ quietly buying up a few more properties and sweetening the pot by incorporating the cash starved TTC (Dundas West) into their plans. It would be hard to say no to a plan that benefits the TTC and transit in general. A few more properties would solve their access problems. Even if a new developer buys it there will still be access issues so I tend to think whoever has that corner will go big.I also think (hope) that the south west corner, one of the ugliest in the city, looks prime for a tear down and intensification of some sort. I agree with Hilary that the east side of Dundas is the new gateway to the Junction and will be developed (I feel) rapidly. I wonder if Price Chopper owns the land to the south where the used car place is.
There are many places in this city where people will spend 800,000 dollars to live in a house next to a tall building such as the Yonge/Eglington and High Park as examples. And those are residential side streets like Erskine and Broadway Avenues and Pacific and Quebec respectively. Nobody has lost money owning one of those homes.You are seeing intensification along Bloor at Highpark and at Bloor and Keele. The number of stories for the Giraffe is consistent with other intensification along Bloor and with existing examples I have mentioned. The old way of thinking with tall buildings in giant open spaces such as seen in East Toronto has been discredited and they are now filling in those spaces with low to mid height build form. I sure would love to see some new life at Bloor and Perth, near my home.
Nicely put Scott, I will be moving to the BOB once they get done. What will happen with the developer and that corner now?
This topic came up at a recent ARC meeting and it was said that there are not enough children to offer this program elsewhere. I think the real issue is teachers. I struggled with putting my daughter in French Immersion as well but in the end she stayed at her school because I liked being a part of its community.
Hillary, the only place where the word NIMBY appears was in your letter.
I agree with you on some points and I also think that some people have opposed this for the wrong reasons whether it be self-interest, fear, or resistance to change.You may not like that but maybe being removed a bit gives some sense of context that being in the middle doesn't.
You have more faith in official plans and by-laws than most. Explain how 351 Wallace got built in violation of the OP. The City caved is how it got built because at the end of the day they did not want to spend money at the OMB fighting the wharehousing of people but instead wanted to fight tall buildings at transit hubs. Show me how this proves the system works. Lets see if the money train continues as developer after developer appeals for exemptions in our general area and they will. Why, because the vacant land or properties that could be redeveloped are too valuable. Our provincial government is about to drop a few billion dollars partially in our area creating a transit hub at Bloor and links up at St. Clair which will create even greater pressure for intensification in the surrounding area. Who runs the OMB ? Put two and two together. Throw in a city that is desperate for cash and we will see how strong these by-laws are.
In terms of Gord Perks, his comments to some extent were idiotic populist pap. You can say whatever you want about the Giraffe but "cookie cutter condo" is not one of them unless you want to play to the home crowd. Reviews of the building from a design point of view were unanimously filled with praise for originality. I thought Gord was above pandering but not so.
There are many people like your self who have informed views on this issue and I know that we agree on some things and dont on others but I have great respect for all the hours and research you have done. I can also say that I have talked to some residents in the area who were running around with their heads cut off like the Giraffe was the end of civilization as we know it seemingly with no knowledge of how much better the west end is from what it was even 20 years ago. I had to sit and listen to people lecture me about how bad the Giraffe would be when I know that they havent got out of their car and walked anywhere in their hood for years and never shop in the area and dont know anything about the history of the area. Maybe the Bloor stretch would not be DEAD (or at least more alive) if they cared as much about it as suddenly they have: People who didnt care about Metrolinx and how that will physically affect the area and their precious home prices and instead got all ruddy faced about one tall building that will probably do more to revive that corner and create green living than anything that has happened on that corner in 40 years. More than a few said they were against it because they did not like the way it looked.
There are tall buildings next to homes at Kipling and Islington and they seem to be ok. There is more street life there than ever. At 6 points there is a major redevelopment, probably more to your liking but they have the space. Intensification in the more downtown areas requires that you build up, there is no other solution and being near transit hubs makes all the sense in the world. Its the way things are going to go and would be better to embrace it and work with it than fear it.
I want to save a special section for the Crossways: it doesnt mean anything except how not to develop a corner. The setback that people talk about actually works against the building, corralling it off from the streetscape and making sure that it is never integrated with the community. Setbacks on dense properties are bad for busy urban corners. The Crossways proves this.
I agree with you about access and I think the developer made a tactical and design error by not buying at least two more properties but many people who went to the meetings had no problem with the actual design or height. They were drowned out. On the east side we have seen how even a boring building like BeBloor is bringing life to a very neglected strip of town and most people in our area would welcome the intensification and life that something like Giraffe could bring to Bloor. Its only a matter of time before the houses along Bloor, many already with that waiting for development look, are redeveloped and there will be many views on that but most people I have talked with welcome it including tall buildings. At the end of the day I personally believe that tall building should be built to intensify street corners near transit hubs and that it is the green and responsible thing to do while bringing life to a street. Everything I have seen and read tells me this is the today, tomorrow, and future of cities.
Nice to think this would be a possibility. My daughter is in Grade 1 and has been attending Regal Road in the FI program since SK. She is loving it there, and we as parents like the school very much. What we miss most, however, is having the school close by and feeling that we are part of the community in which she goes to school. She attended Perth during JK, and it was wonderful to walk back and forth with her and to get to know our neighbours and other parents. For anyone contemplating this decision, I would definitely add this to everything you have to mull. Personally (though I can say so many great things about Regal Road and FI in general) I feel it is a lot to give up, sending your child outside the neighbourhood. It would be great for families to have the option of schooling here in the Junction Triangle AND choosing French Immersion.
Having represented the West Bend Community Association on the LAC for the Avenue Study, I don't really understand the postings here about residents being motivated by NIMBY-ism and fear of change. Throughout the process, from the Bloor Visioning workshops to the OMB hearing itself, I would say the majority of residents support intensification around Bloor-Dundas. No-one really thinks that the strip malls (Midas, 7/11) and parking-focused sites (Shoppers/Price Chopper, Loblaws/Zellers) on Bloor and Dundas are defensible or desirable. We all know they will be intensified and that's a good thing.
Given that understanding, there is room for legitimate disagreement over what built form should be used to achieve intensification. Should density be piled up on a few corners (as in The Crossways Complex and the Giraffe proposal) or should it be distributed more evenly across many sites? In the Official Plan, in place as a defining policy document for about 10 years now, the Avenues (including Bloor and Dundas) are targeted for intensification through a mainly mid-rise built form (the distributed density model), while the Downtown and the three Centres accommodate tall buildings (the more concentrated density model). One may disagree with the OP but this isn't a new concept; yet the developer decided to take on the OP and the Planning Department, instead of coming in with a project that would be a better fit for this tight site. Obviously, they thought they could make a case, but on the evidence presented at the hearing, their case proved to be much weaker than the city's case and they lost. Given the weight of evidence, it would have been surprising if the verdict had gone the other way.
No-one who lives in the neighbourhood can be happy that we will have to live with what may be a derelict site for some time to come but approving this application - which, I must point out, was also an appeal against the new Avenue By-law - would have undermined the intent of the by-law across the entire study area. During the hearing, we heard for the first time that the owner of the Shoppers/Price Chopper site had come in with a concept for two tall (20+-storeys) towers. If the Giraffe appeal had been successful, I'm sure this application would have come back, citing the Giraffe precedent, and other applications for other sites may well have followed. For developers and for residents, having a new by-law with as-of-right zoning provides a more stable development environment. Everyone knows what's allowed and we don't have to go on a site-by-site basis. That doesn't mean that developers won't ask for variances here and there but we expect to see less of that.
I was at all the meetings. There were people for it but the NIMBY's far outnumbered others so I did not go to the design charette. I would repeat though that there were people (including me) who had some very valid concerns about access. For me the actual building was the best point.
Very funny. Great community spirit!
We would like to put a shout out to any green thumbs who would like to help out this year with the community garden at the corner of Symington Ave. and Rankin Cres. We meet every Sunday morning at 10:00 am. We will be starting up again probably by late April. I will notify everyone before then. We are also always happy to take seedlings and plants to add to the garden. Donations are welcome. Hope you can help.
Check out this amusing poster I saw on the Railpath yesterday. It's a fun way to remind people to keep the Railpath tidy, right down to the smallest pebble. :)
What will Giraffe (TASdesigns) do now?
Not Far From the Tree
http://www.notfarfromthetree.org/
Not Far From the Tree picks fruit from trees that would otherwise go to waste. They help fruit tree owners make use of the abundance of fruit that their trees offer by dispatching teams of volunteers to harvest it for them. One third goes to the fruit tree owners, another third goes to the volunteers for their labour, and the final third is distributed (by bicycle or cart) to community organizations in the neighbourhood who can make good use of the fresh fruit.
You can register your tree at http://www.notfarfromthetree.org/registration.
Please note that you do not need to be home when volunteers come to pick your tree.
perks is just another politician who doesn't want to upset the voters. maybe his stance would've been difference if it was dec 2010, and already re-ected.
why does this neighbourhood oppose everything? why do residents feel the need work against the planning process, instead of with it?
well, good luck with that corner...maybe another coffee time or payday loan store can open up and you'll all be happy.
There are some better views of that gazebo in these photos: here and here. Maybe I'll post then'n'now for those ones someday too.
Or imagine having Google Streetview available for dates in the past? In the future, I wonder if Google will make older versions of Streetview available for browsing.
An interesting note is that in the old photo is a gazebo tram stop and today there is the Railpath map and starting point. Sometimes I would give anything to go back for one day and walk up from Dowling Ave. in my long time home of Parkdale all the way up Sorauren and then Sterling and Perth to where I live today; to see (and smell!) it all and meet a few folks who shaped my community today.
The planning meetings do not exactly attract a representative cross section of the community. People who hate proposed changes are far more motivated to show up. Even then, many people at the meetings about the Giraffe project have been supportive.
We will see what happens but I hope we don't end up watching the existing building decay. The FODB used the building on the South West corner as a positive example but I think it has to be the ugliest building in the city - probably in the universe.
When you manage to get a good architect working on a project, it makes sense to me to show some respect for that.
I like the challenge of using up leftovers in my fridge and coming up with something new to nosh on. Frugal can be yummy.
This morning, I cobbled together this breakfast:
Leftovers:
Yes, it would be great if people came out to this meeting, but not this Monday, unless they want to get a really good seat early. The meeting is on March 22, a week after this Monday, March 15.
We really need to show the City, and Metrolinx, that people are concerned with this issue by showing up for this meeting. Its a rare chance to show them that we have not forgotten the issue.
"‘You can't take the big-buck, easy-way, cookie-cutter development and throw a condo tower on every corner. You actually have to think about the neighbourhood where you're building.'” Says Perks.
Giraffe was hardly a fast buck cookie cutter condo, it was 100% the opposite. Perks is playing the populist here as many people didnt like the building because it wasnt a bland cookie cutter condo like the one at Glen Lake. There used to be metal foundries only a few years ago along Dundas that spewed dangerous fumes and people still lived there. I guess that was not as scary as a new condo at a transit hub. And nobody seems to complain about the Shoppers with the giant parking lot that attracts tons of car traffic to the area. Funny how selective people can be about what is good planning.
Hilary Bells concerns are good ones and I dont understand why the developer didnt buy one more building to give them more room; it seems so obvious. I agree there has to be a way for a high quality game changing development to happen at that corner. If the Giraffe wants to move a bit east I would welcome it.
Michael and Shelley have expanded the menu offerings at Boo Radley's to include voting in the second (and final) round of the Fuzzy Boundaries naming project. Boo Radley's is at 1482 Dupont Street and you can find a ballot box and ballots on the ledge right across from the long bar.
I am really disappointed that they wouldn't at least offer some sort of variance that would approve a reasonable height; reasonable being one that would not negatively impact the character of the intersection & community, but one that would still make the the site attractive to the developer.
Why is it always a conversation about what doesn't work rather than what could work?
As always I find myself not agreeing with the OMB. Corners of major intersections near TTC and a future transit GO hub is exactly where tall buildings should go.
I would agree that it was too high and there were serious traffic/walker issues with the entrance but I hope they dont walk away or sell off so we get a fourth ugly building on that corner. That area needs some energy and revitalization.
Some will call this a victory but I may turn out to be a hollow one.
This email is from Councillor Gord Perks' office:
On Sunday, March 14, beginning at 1 p.m., Fuzzy Boundaries will be bringing music to the streets of our neighbourhood to encourage people to vote before the polls close (online until midnight) and celebrate the end of the naming project.
There are three ways to enjoy the music of the Baturyn Concert Marching Band. A musical parade will be passing by a majority of the houses in the neighbourhood (route map: http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=3469062). You can see the band go by twice at Perth Park. Or, you can take a walk through the neighbourhood with us as the band plays on.
More details will follow (and a better map when our over-worked web guy gets a moment), but we hope that you will tell your friends about this special event in our neighbourhood.