Search results

200 Dundas Street East (Hilton Garden Hotel) (Page + Steele, 48 + 35) There is a public open house tonight at Metropolitan United Church's dining room from 6pm-9pm. Background file: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-43081.pdf

The parking lot across from the Grand is the Ryerson proposal I believe.

First Pace, then Ryerson's residence tower to the south, and now the redevelopment of the Garden Hilton at the northeast corner. The big question is when will plans emerge for the former Sears parking lot!

“We are talking to residents, talking to the councillor, talking to the TTC, talking to Metrolinx. We are still at the talking stage. We are nine months away from filing a proposal. We don’t want to surprise anybody. We don’t want to have problems like we had here,†he adds, a reference...

I'm not sure how that would work in practice. I'm trying to think back to when I worked as a planning in the USA, which was appeals to courts. I think they were virtually hearings de novo because what "point of law" could the court make a decision upon that isn't informed by all others...

I was thinking more of those areas where the Gardiner is not overlapped with Lakeshore. The city has shown a significant disinterest in actually using non-roadway lands under the Gardiner for park space and other passive uses. Or hell, stick buildings underneath it and stick stores in there or...

Um... not really. At all. The OMB is an attempt to make courts accessible to more people. Removing the OMB just puts appeals into the courts, where they will be largely inaccessible to most people.

The problem with the Gardiner is not that it is elevated; the problem is that it is hollow.

Technically, the motion requested that the OMB be abolished, and as a backup that Toronto be removed from its jurisdiction. These municipalities can only speak for themselves. Presumably, if other municipalities want out of the OMB, they will pass similar resolutions. Which will also be...

I just noticed that PGM also recommended that the City setup a local appeal body for Committee of Adjustment applications.

Yes, but OPs are more broad policy that is open to interpretation. Zoning isn't.

As an Official Plan isn't law the way a Zoning By-law is law, could a Court even deal with issues related to it?

By your comments, I'm reasonably sure you have no idea how planning and development is done in Toronto/Ontario.

The money changing hands takes place at the municipal level (i.e. Section 37 bonusing). When a project gets to the OMB, it is simply all out war.

PGM unanimously approves motion to request that the Province abolish the OMB or at least remove Toronto from its jurisdiction.

Why is that?

Yes, I think that's the case. I believe they want only points of law, not points of "good planning" or whatever, appealable. I can see the appeal of this measure. In theory, it could make developers more likely to bargain "in good faith" with the local councillor (because, let's be honest...

(I didn't see this posted yet... sorry if repost) The City of Mississauga and Councillors Wong-Tam and Matlow in Toronto want their respective cities (at least) removed from OMB review. No local appeals body would take their place (at least, as how Cllr Wong-Tam sees it). Appeals would go to...

My version of the headline: Ugly building that ignores its context, approved by Community Council that will accept anything it is given.

Yawn. Blandtastic.