News   May 03, 2024
 994     1 
News   May 03, 2024
 604     0 
News   May 03, 2024
 289     0 

The Kingsway

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
9,525
Reaction score
4,182
Location
The Junction, Toronto
Passing through the Kingsway neighbourhood, the "anti-overdevelopment" lawn signs are noticeable. But with street after street of luxurious historic single family homes, one wonders what exactly could they be fighting against. As it turns out, a developer wants to build a condominium along Dundas West, consistent with the Avenues Plan, if exceeding height restrictions. Is the loss of three houses setting a precedent for overdevelopment and detrimental to the health of the neighbourhood?

Kingsway residents take on plans for nearby condo
January 07, 2008
by Barry Hertz

One of Toronto’s wealthiest enclaves is badly divided over a 7½-storey condo development that critics say could set a dangerous precedent for neighbourhoods across Toronto.

The Post's Kelly Grant reports:
The Strand condominium is proposed for Dundas Street West at Prince Edward Drive, one of the few drab corners of Etobicoke’s Kingsway neighbourhood, a planned community of stately old mansions, including some guarded by black iron gates.

The critical issue is not the proposed 7½-storey height on a street that allows a maximum of six storeys — although the residents’ group spearheading the fight opposes that, as well — it is Dunpar Development Inc.’s decision to purchase three single-family homes behind the site, bulldoze them and extend the condo into the neighbourhood.

“We’re defending against developers knocking down perfectly suitable homes, family homes and putting up high- rises,†said Dean French of Kingsway Residents Against Poor Planning (KRAPP) and a 40-year-old father of three.

Dunpar needs at least a zoning and site plan amendment to complete its plan. KRAPP, city council and city planning staff opposed the change. The case went to the Ontario Municipal Board in December, where the residents have already won a procedural victory.

Now they are waiting for the final decision. It is expected as early as this month.

Local Councillor Peter Milczyn fears that if the OMB sides with Dunpar, anyone who lives on a residential street a few houses from a major thoroughfare risks having a condominium or other tall development move in next door.

“That’s the fight here,†the councillor said. “Can the boundaries between main streets and residential streets be broken?â€

The whole story makes residents of The Kingsway especially nervous, because Dunpar owns more property on Dundas Street West and it owns some single-family homes near those holdings.

While KRAPP is eager to improve the Dundas West strip, currently a collection of strip malls, it is wary of changes to its coveted residential neighbourhood.

Bounded roughly by the Humber River to the east, Dundas West to the north, Bloor Street to the south and Royal York Road to the west, The Kingsway was bought by Robert Home Smith, a Stratford-born developer, just before the outbreak of the First World War. He hoped to transform it into an English Garden suburb; his vision became reality after the Bloor Street bridge over the Humber was completed in 1924 and wealthy businessmen started to move in.

Dunpar executives say The Strand will not alter the feel of this long-standing community. Tom Giancos, the company’s vice-president of development, believes opponents are exaggerating the problems and the precedents The Strand could create.

“We’ve made concessions and we’ve done our best to work with the community,†he said. Dunpar, a company that has built more than 1,000 townhomes in Etobicoke, Mississauga and Vaughan, has scaled back its original plan for a 10-storey condo on Dundas West. It has promised to turn the southernmost lot on Prince Edward Drive into a landscaped driveway, meaning the condo will not butt up directly against the nearest house on the side street.

As well, Mr. Giancos said the main lot on Dundas West has a dogleg that already extends to the edge of the southernmost lot. “We’re simply trying to square the property,†he said.

Mr. Giancos is working to calm fears that Dunpar has a grand plan to raze its single-family homes near Dundas for condos. “We have no development applications on any of that property,†he said. “Some of it has sat there for 10 years.â€

Further complicating Dunpar’s quest to the win over the community has been confusion about who actually speaks for residents of The Kingsway.

Technically, the area is represented by Kingsway Park Ratepayers Inc., the incorporated local ratepayers group.

When Dunpar approached them about The Strand, KPRI’s board agreed to back a compromise because they felt going to the OMB would be too costly.

Last March, Dunpar took KPRI’s letter of support to the Etobicoke-York Community Council and, over the objections of Mr. Milczyn and planning staff, won approval for the project.

Mr. Milczyn fired back, accusing KPRI in a public letter of misleading residents and councillors about support for the condo. “It is truly sad that the KPRI chose to send inaccurate, if not misleading, information through the community to garner support for the developer,’’ he wrote. “This is a shocking turn of events, a breach of community trust.â€

Mary Campbell, a director of KPRI, said her group has received the cold shoulder and some nasty phone calls since the incident. KPRI declined to be interviewed directly for this story. Instead, they provided a statement explaining why they opted for a compromise. “Having previously fought the good fight at the OMB and lost,†the statement said in part, “we recognize and empathize with the difficulty of generating the cash and the energy as a group of volunteers to continually fight a battle so clearly stacked against us.â€

After the community council vote, KRAPP, which had formed to add its voice to a vision study for improving Dundas West, sprung into action to fight The Strand. The group collected 1,600 signatures on a petition and convinced the full city council to back an OMB fight, which it did last April. It raised $102,000 from more than 200 people for the OMB fight.

Now, as Kingsway residents await the board’s decision, Mr. French said the OMB battle has left him wondering how Etobicoke communities less affluent than Kingsway could ever afford to ward off developers.

“We’ve spent $102,000 [at the OMB] and we ha $40,000 more to raise,†he said. “I don’t know how Rexdale, Mimico, other wonderful communities in Etobicoke could do this.â€
 
Developing midrise buildings along major roads is key to intensification and moving past suburban structure. Developers can't build too high because of the neighbouring houses, and yet the height appears to be much less important to these residents. This whole thing comes off as NIMBYism. The neighbourhood won't be scarred by a minimal loss of houses on its fringes. They stand to gain better access to retail. Overdevelopment is a hyperbole. Anyone familiar with St. Jamestown knows that it replaced an entire middle class neighbourhood. 7 storeys of midrise along a major road is hardly a spark for a repeat. If they raise the money they'll most likely lose at the OMB. In the end, the proposed development won't even directly neighbour anyone.

Of course, that acronym is just great.
 
Somehow, I can also see them as the sort who'd protest an aA design on Dundas, Bloor, whatever, because it isn't in keeping with a "Kingsway spirit"...
 
Went past the site in question a few hours ago. I honestly don't understand what all the fuss is about. On the southwest corner of the intersection there's a large 3 storey office and retail building, on the north side (Prince Edward ends there) there's a fairly new 6 storey condo, and 2 blocks to the east on the south side there's a huge new condo nearing completion (which is 6 or 7 storeys, but with a very large footprint). The whining is nothing other than bullshit knee-jerk nimbyism at its finest. One has to be quite selfish to find the motivation to fight a 7 storey development along a major street (one that's been identified by the city as an avenue appropriate for densification) despite the presence of similarly scaled buildings in the immediate area. Just for this attitude alone I hope the OMB approves the developer's original request for 10 storeys.
 
I live in the Kingsway, though closer to Bloor than Dundas. I'm sort of agnostic about the proposed development, as it will not really affect me.

I'm a bit puzzled by the "bullshit NIMBYism" comments. I can certainly understand why people would not want condos and yet more condos stuffed into their neighbourhood - seems these days every available square foot is filled with condos. The fact that there already exist lots of condos in the immediate neighbourhood strikes me as not necessarily a good reason to put yet more in.

That being said, I'm no urban planner. I just live here. To my mind, it makes sense to balance the desire on the part of the residents not to have the neighbourhood change with the desire of developers to maximize income. One source of concern to me is the fact that Toronto seems to have gone condo-crazy, and I wonder what will happen if there is a downturn in the market.
 
Can't say that I would support the project in its current format.

As for the NIMBY's, they're not always wrong you know.

It's incredible many on this board that support almost all forms of condo development resemble the ideas and thoughts city planners had in the 60's and 70's that absolutely devoided Toronto of a large quantity of historical buildings.
 
I live in the Kingsway, though closer to Bloor than Dundas. I'm sort of agnostic about the proposed development, as it will not really affect me.

I'm a bit puzzled by the "bullshit NIMBYism" comments. I can certainly understand why people would not want condos and yet more condos stuffed into their neighbourhood - seems these days every available square foot is filled with condos. The fact that there already exist lots of condos in the immediate neighbourhood strikes me as not necessarily a good reason to put yet more in.

That being said, I'm no urban planner. I just live here. To my mind, it makes sense to balance the desire on the part of the residents not to have the neighbourhood change with the desire of developers to maximize income. One source of concern to me is the fact that Toronto seems to have gone condo-crazy, and I wonder what will happen if there is a downturn in the market.

No one is stuffing a condo into the neighbourhood, because it's being built along Dundas. If a condo was being built in the low rise heart of the neighbourhood, this matter would be entirely different. It's not like the developer purchased the houses at Prince Edward and Strath.

The general idea behind the enthusiasm for condos from an urban planning perspective is that density of people encourages pedestrian and transit friendly neighbourhoods, which curb urban sprawl, and are generally a lot better for the environment. It has the potential to build better cities, make places interesting that ordinarily people would simply drive by and ignore. You could have a nice midrise avenue of cafes and businesses within walking distance.
 
No they're not always wrong, but what are your objections to the project?

Probably the fact that they're planning on demolishing three single family dwellings. Other than that, I would reduce the size of the condo to 5 stories.
 
No one is stuffing a condo into the neighbourhood, because it's being built along Dundas. If a condo was being built in the low rise heart of the neighbourhood, this matter would be entirely different. It's not like the developer purchased the houses at Prince Edward and Strath.

The general idea behind the enthusiasm for condos from an urban planning perspective is that density of people encourages pedestrian and transit friendly neighbourhoods, which curb urban sprawl, and are generally a lot better for the environment. It has the potential to build better cities, make places interesting that ordinarily people would simply drive by and ignore. You could have a nice midrise avenue of cafes and businesses within walking distance.

I thought, at least from what I read, that the objections to it are three-fold:

1. Putting a large (originally, 10-story) building on the main street would in effect overshadow the neighbourhood.

2. The building would in fact project into the low-rise neighbourhood, as the developers have bought up some houses.

3. Higher density = more traffic on Prince Edward, which already has lots.

As for the benefits of condos, those benefits seem to accrue to others - the notion being I suppose that a condo (relatively) near downtown is better than a buch of single-family dwelling out of town, requiring more car use etc.

This is true, but must IMO be balanced against the fact that the people who already live here like the place as it is - a nice, treed neighbourhood which is *already* interesting, transit-friendly, etc.

I disagree with this:

No one is stuffing a condo into the neighbourhood ...

Indeed, the whole "selling point" of these condos appears to be that it *is* in The Kingsway:

http://thestrandcondos.ca/register/

Note the advertisement: "Introducing a ... condominium residence in the Kingsway". [Emphasis mine]

And in the copy:

Register today for a rare lifestyle of intimate elegance, idyllically set in one of Toronto's most exclusive neighbourhoods.
[Emphasis mine]

It would appear that the developer and the residents are both of the opinion it is "in the neighbourhood". While the residents may be wrong in this, it is hard to blame them for making such a mistake when the developer is claiming that their development is "idyllically set" in their neighbourhood.

To my mind, the Kingsway is interesting because of the style of the houses, each one being a variation on a theme. It is worth preserving as it is. That being said, I'm not sure that the present plan is really all that damaging - it is as you say on the outskirts of the neighbourhood, and the Dundas side really isn't all that nice as it is. I can however understand why people would not want encroachment. The more condos are built "in the neighbourhood", the less the neighbourhood will have the attractive features that caused people to want to build condos there in the first place.
 
The more condos are built "in the neighbourhood", the less the neighbourhood will have the attractive features that caused people to want to build condos there in the first place.
That's not a hard rule though by any means though. It would depend on a variety of things (ie. design, massing, neighbourhood issues, etc.)
 
It would appear that the developer and the residents are both of the opinion it is "in the neighbourhood". While the residents may be wrong in this, it is hard to blame them for making such a mistake when the developer is claiming that their development is "idyllically set" in their neighbourhood.

To my mind, the Kingsway is interesting because of the style of the houses, each one being a variation on a theme. It is worth preserving as it is. That being said, I'm not sure that the present plan is really all that damaging - it is as you say on the outskirts of the neighbourhood, and the Dundas side really isn't all that nice as it is. I can however understand why people would not want encroachment. The more condos are built "in the neighbourhood", the less the neighbourhood will have the attractive features that caused people to want to build condos there in the first place.

It's very unfortunate that they went with the Kingsway marketing. There's a chance that this might not do anything for Dundas retail. That's something that residents should demand from this developer. Of course the Kingsway is great for the houses and character, and it's definitely worth preserving. If condos are restricted to Dundas, and if they're designed properly, very little is going to change in the neighbourhood. In fact, with another retail strip nearby, it might just become a better place to live.
 

Back
Top