Toronto 777 Victoria Park Avenue | 75.89m | 23s | Alterra | Montgomery Sisam

CreateTO 's agenda for next week is out, and this site is the subject of a report with a confidential attachment.


While I still think the 'new approach' is taking a bit longer than it should here........ I will note that we now have a revised, and hopefully final timeline for construction that appears to have been advanced vs where we were just a short while ago.
I'd like to think some discussion here may have played a small role in that, whether or not that's true! LOL

Key public bits of info:

1718287323148.png

1718287354769.png
 
Northern Light said:
CreateTO 's agenda for next week is out, and this site is the subject of a report with a confidential attachment.


While I still think the 'new approach' is taking a bit longer than it should here........ I will note that we now have a revised, and hopefully final timeline for construction that appears to have been advanced vs where we were just a short while ago.
I'd like to think some discussion here may have played a small role in that, whether or not that's true! LOL

Key public bits of info:

View attachment 572031
View attachment 572032
Click to expand...
WED. JULY 24th - Committee of Adjustment - Scarborough
777 VICTORIA PARK AVE application for a "Minor Variance" is being heard in the afternoon.

PDF - https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/u...t-Scarborough-Hearing-Agenda-July-24-2024.pdf
 
Thanks to @HousingNowTO for the headsup, lets grab the details from the Cover Letter:

@Paclo

1719959718236.png

1719959749307.png

****

1719959843714.png


Render from the Arch. Plans:

1719959962926.png


Site Plan:

1719960058348.png


I'm going to say here, I don't have any real problems w/the height or massing as proposed...... but I'm not keen on the path through the C of A here.

A height increase of 11s or just shy of 50% by storey count really is not 'minor'.

I'm happy to support this proposal, and I won't throw up any road blocks, but, to me, rules/guidelines ought to have a reasonable, (if flexible), consistent meaning. and I don't see how the word minor is being consistently applied here.
 
Last edited:
Scarborough Committee of Adjustment tends to be pretty "timid" in what they will normally allow for consideration as a "Minor Variance".

It will be interesting to see how they respond to adding 11-Storeys and 194-Units to a City-sponsored project as a "Minor Variance"...?
 
HousingNowTO said:
Scarborough Committee of Adjustment tends to be pretty "timid" in what they will normally allow for consideration as a "Minor Variance".

It will be interesting to see how they respond to adding 11-Storeys and 194-Units to a City-sponsored project as a "Minor Variance"...?
Click to expand...

I think that's aggressive, as I note above. I support the proposal, and moving it through at an expedited timeline (something that should have happened moons ago, but we all know that story at this point) .....

But I'm not sure this is the right process track......

If this doesn't clear, that would move it to the September SCC/Council agendas, I assume; unless there were a means to bring it to the July meeting of Council directly.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top