Here's the thing - I am expressing anger and frustration. That is the purpose of my post. Winning people over? I am one person in a tsunami of concrete and blu glass and rising maintenance fees, I doubt I'd have any sway. I assumed everyone on here is like that guy.
I'm not certain that this proposal merits anger; perhaps, depending on one's taste, disappointment; but that's a subjective call.
Regardless; I think you'll find if you express yourself calmly, and with nuance, you'll find at least some audience here. Perhaps a minority, but nonetheless, some people with whom you might commiserate if nothing else; but also perhaps discuss ways to advance policies you would prefer.
Given that this is a forum full of urban planners, architects, engineers, developers, and activists of all stripes you're bound to find information that could prove useful to you; providing you leave people with a desire to engage.
You may encounter the odd inflammatory response; that's unfortunate, but over-reaction, particularly when new here will not serve you well.
Recently Daniels corporation built an "apartment building" the prices on the finished apartments are astronomical. $1600 for 300 square feet. this is a development corporation that's been given permission to tear down much needed subsidized housing under the guise of developing derelict property with the promise that they will keep units accessibly priced.
I'm not sure which property you're citing, and so can't engage critically.
I suspect though, that you'll find that at the very least any replaced units were put back at their original rents (plus inflation)
Additional units may well be priced substantially higher. But the particulars will vary site to site.
You can't tell me that these particular apartments are about density and not the view
I'm not sure why they can't be about both? Additional units are additional units with or without a view.
, because there are loads of properties on Dundas that actually in need development. as well as ones on Sherbourne, shutter, College, Victoria park, main, Coxwell, the list goes on.
Developers purchase properties from willing sellers, where they perceive a strong potential for return on investment.
That certainly includes looking at potential rent/purchase price of the end product. So certainly more desirable areas will get lots of looks from developers.
But there are also proposals going in at Main/Danforth and Main/Kingston Road right now; there is development coming to Coxwell/Gerrard and Coxwell/Danforth, and the immediate vicinity of Coxwell/Queen.
Victoria Park has substantial proposals going forward just north of Gerrard, beside the subway station and surrounding O'Connor/Eglinton.
These happen for a variety of reasons (City-owned land, more permissive zoning/densities, older developments coming due for renewal with larger property already in place....etc)
None of that precludes looking at opportunities on Broadview as well.
Again, reno-evictions like this one are the cause of the housing shortage and not the solution.
Renovictions are a real problem; though they are more a symptom of the housing shortage than a cause. The number of units at issue as compared to the scale of the shortage is not all that material.
Which makes it no less unfair to someone reno-victed.
As for aesthetics, the plans on here do not clearly display how it will look and I really genuinely don't understand why they can't make the extension more like the house.
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
Now that's a good contribution for discussion, which I will bring forward so everyone can see.
From:
https://www.facebook.com/Kanitz-Pro.../photos/pcb.1905324376291338/1905324289624680
