Showing posts with label 35 Pacific Avenue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 35 Pacific Avenue. Show all posts

Saturday, January 14, 2012

The Bloor/Oakmount Block condo project, local Councillor Sarah Doucette reverses her decision


What letting your councillor know yours views  can do.


 

http://www.1844bloorstreetwest.com

Full article at insidetoronto.com

all text below from article

More community consultation for controversial High Park Condo


Standing room only community council meeting degenerates into shouting match


A highly contested High Park condo proposal likened by one west-end councillor to "putting a gorilla in a fishbowl" was referred back for more community consultation this week after a two-and-a-half hour meeting disintegrated into a shouting match.

The controversial development application - which proposes a 14-storey, 378-residential-unit, mixed-use building directly across from High Park on Bloor Street West - drew the ire of a standing-room-only crowd at Etobicoke York Community Council (EYCC) Tuesday night.

After an hour of similar deputations and visibly taken off guard by the long grocery list of complaints presented by her constituents, local Councillor Sarah Doucette admitted to having a change of heart - reversing her decision to approve the development in favour of seeking more time for consultation between the developer and the community.



 

 



 

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Held and adopted by councilor today Official Plan, for the lands at 1844-1854 Bloor Street West; 35-37 Pacific Avenue; and, 6-14 and part of 18 and 18a Oakmount Road

and adopted  

Recommendations held today
The City Planning Division recommends that:

 

1. City Council amend the Official Plan, for the lands at 1844-1854 Bloor Street West; 35-37 Pacific Avenue; and, 6-14 and part of 18 and 18a Oakmount Road substantially in accordance with the draft Official Plan Amendment attached as Attachment 6 – Draft Official Plan Amendment to the report dated December 16, 2011.

2. City Council amend Zoning By-law 438-86, for the lands at 1844-1854 Bloor Street West; 35-37 Pacific Avenue; and, 6-14 and part of 18 and 18A Oakmount Road substantially in accordance with the draft Zoning By-law Amendment attached as Attachment 7 to the report dated December 16, 2011.

3. City Council authorize the City Solicitor to make such stylistic and technical changes to the draft Official Plan Amendment and draft Zoning By-law Amendment as may be required.

4. Before introducing the necessary Bills to City Council for enactment, City Council require the owner to enter into an Agreement pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act satisfactory to the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Division, and the City Solicitor, such agreement to be registered on title to the lands at 1844-1854 Bloor Street West; 35-37 Pacific Avenue; and, 6-14 and part of 18 and 18a Oakmount Road, in a manner satisfactory to the City Solicitor to secure the following matters at the owner's expense

and adopted

Monday, January 9, 2012

High Park Residents' Association (HPRA) opinion of redevelopment of Bloor Street, Oakmount Road/Pacific Ave

The Project to construct a 14-storey, mixed-use building with more than 375 residential units, a free-standing day care facility and approximately 1,500 square metres of retail space on the ground level has brought about a disagreement with the developer and the High Park Residents' Association, and other members of the community.

A recent interview with the local councillor posted on the insidetoronto.com simply out lines the lines drawn between the two groups and well the position of the local councillor which seems to ambiguous..maybe it can be read as doubtful or uncertain that much can be changed now.

Some of her statements are entirely valid yet in terms of fronting the opinion for the residents well...many are not happy.

It should be noted that both the residents, the councillor, and the developer have been hampered by the development start occurring in a City of Toronto election year, and stepping in is an new councillor on a running project is difficult, and a Councillors authority in development matters is not omnipotent. Yet there is strength in a counsillors position.

Daniels' original design presented to the community at a consultation meeting had the 14-storeys on Bloor Street West, said the local councillor.

Here the councillor is entirely correct,

"Because people commented, we switched the building around. It's better for High Park, but worse for 22 Oakmount," said Doucette. "I appreciate where they're coming from. I agree, we don't want a solid wall around our park.

Well said, and showing insight into the right to light and view issues that come into play when large buildings are build next to 2 story homes.

Because this is a staggered building, eight floors are on Bloor Street staggered back to 14."

The meaning of this statement is simply not clear as to what this does to mitigate the current concerns of the residents as they have known this for some time, and it is only part of the solution they want.

Doucette said the building will contain other materials besides glass. The city has a policy concerning glass buildings to protect migrating birds, said the councillor.

In this area, the blog thinks most people would like less glass more brick.

"Most concerns have come to us after the third (consultation) meeting. Between the second and third meeting, I received 13 emails - only three were concerned about height," said Doucette. "In the eleventh hour, it doesn't really help."

This statement is the most puzzling, should not residents be supported right up to the last possible reasonable time-frame, and be allowed to increase their action as projects come closer to approval.

Doucette said that this project was one she "inherited" mid-process.

"I hate to say it, but a lot of this was done before me," she said.

In this statement she is not entirely correct, the project was introduced in introduced in June of 2010, yes this is six months before her election, but in the middle.

"We've reduced the shading on Oakmount Road family homes and addressed the concerns of residents regarding a laneway from Oakmount to Pacific. Daniels has bought some of the TTC land and created a bend in the laneway (preventing cars from racing through)."

Good work on the bend in the laneway to slow cars down, laneway cutting is a big problem in much of the north area of ward 13.

The word "we've" common is ambiguous - is it her and residents, her and the developer, or her and city staff. Although lack of in this area can contributed to the insidetoronto reporter.

The planning department and the councillor have encouraged the developer to listen to the residents.













Friday, May 15, 2009

National Post on 1844-1854 Bloor Street West, 6-14 Oakmount Road, and 35 & 47 Pacific Avenue

[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="300" caption="One of the buildings at Pacific Ave and Bloor St."]One of the buildings at Pacific Ave and Bloor St.[/caption]

The National Post Newspaper ran a article yesterday on the boarded-up block of Bloor St. west just west of Keele St.  [link to article] [map location window 1844-1854 Bloor St west.]

An excerpt from the article...

A hearing next week will decide the fate of a boarded-up block of brick houses overlooking High Park, which the owner hopes to demolish to make way for a new condo building.


W.J. Properties applied for a permit to demolish the block of houses along Bloor Street West in March, 2006, but council refused to approve it since the owner didn’t offer up re-development plans with the application. Senior city planner David Spence said city staff is worried the block will sit vacant after demolition — decreasing density in the neighbourhood — and they want to know how existing rental units will be replaced.  [link to article]

...and some well thought words from the local Councillor who is spot on the block will be used for development  simply because of it's location, in the City of Toronto retaining single family zoning on Bloor Street is probably not a high priority nor a reasonable planning use.


Councillor Bill Saundercook (Parkdale-High Park) said the houses are attractive, but will inevitably make way for kind development.

“It’s a bit of an anomally in that the houses are still standing there,” he said.

Council often makes developers revise their plans repeatedly before giving out building permits. If W.J. Properties tears down the Bloor West buildings before this sometimes-lengthy process begins, the lot might stay empty for many months.

Mr. Saundercook is more concerned about involving the public in redevelopment plans than how long the site might sit vacant. “I would like to see a very cohesive plan that I believe an informed developer could make,” he said, “and that would include how long they speculated for this site to be sitting vacant, what they plan on doing while it is vacant and then try to hold them as rigidly as possible to a development plan.”



Friday, February 20, 2009

City to Appeal Demolition Permits supported by Ontario Municipal Board for Ward 13 Development site

[caption id="attachment_2826" align="alignright" width="300" caption="1854 Bloor Street West Side door was door to a former doctors offices Photo: www.tobuilt.ca"]1854 Bloor Street West Side door was door to a former doctors offices Photo: www.tobuilt.c[/caption]

The Site owners of  1844-1854 Bloor Street West, 6-14 Oakmount Road, and 35 & 47 Pacific Avenue have brought applications  seeking permission to demolish 13 residential buildings.

Cot's position from their reports...


In March 2006, demolition permit applications were made to demolish 13 houses located at the Site. No building permit application or redevelopment proposal to replace the buildings has been submitted.
On March 27, 2007, the Etobicoke York Community Council considered a staff report dated March 13, 2007, which recommended that the demolition control applications brought by the property owners in respect of the Site be refused and that, in the event of an appeal, the City Solicitor and appropriate staff be authorized to attend at the
Ontario Municipal Board in support of the recommendation.

Consideration of the report was deferred to give the owners the opportunity to respond to concerns the City had about the proposed demolition. The owners failed to address the City’s concerns, and appealed the failure of City Council to approve the demolition permit applications that had been submitted.

Appeal of OMB Decision Re: 1844-1854 Bloor Street
West, 6-14 Oakmount Road, and 35 & 47 Pacific Avenue
Appeals of Demolition Permit Refusals


The March 13, 2007, Staff Report

The June 18, 2008, Staff Report:

The June 20, 2008, Staff Report:

Each and every day multiple hours I miss Matt and Nate

 He’s really does not answer my questions about Matt and Nate, No way, they know the truth