HousingNowTO
Senior Member
New Updated City Planning Sign (2024)…
Toronto 985 Woodbine | 125.9m | 35s | Choice Properties | superkül
- Thread starter AlbertC
- Start date
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
Northern Light
Superstar
A column in the local community newspaper (Beach Metro News) is more than a little NIMBY here. I don't throw that word around as much as some others here...........but if you read the piece you'll understand why I do here.
beachmetro.com
Aside from clearly disliking the height and the architecture of the tower, and getting a few facts wrong along the way..............
The opinion piece has some major digressions/tirades that are very curious, essentially the author comes out in favour of a public builder here, more or less (I'm paraphrasing) because REITS/developers are evil. LOL
I don't know what @ProjectEnd ever did to this fellow..... LOL
I will say..........he does manage the odd good point, buried under a deluge of lesser ones.......
I don't know why you don't arrive at a public meeting like this, knowing the flack you're going to take, and that your strategy of 'selling' will be based in part on the need for affordable, rental housing, without at least offering a handful of units, even if you have to as asterisk beside them and say 'subject to acceptance by the City as a Community Benefit'
Lets be honest, they were going to take it on the chin over the height here regardless........but coming in w/something tangible for the community would have seemed wise.
That said, the author's polemic is rather a bit much and not particularly coherent as these things go.
In My Opinion: Private profits, rental housing and the ‘monolithic’ proposal for Woodbine and Danforth – Beach Metro Community News
By ADAM SMITH In the public consultation about 985 Woodbine Ave. (at the northeast corner of Danforth Avenue), Andre D’Elia, architect from Superkul, said they “wanted to make sure that it didn’t feel monolithic”, an ironic choice of words as “monolithic” is the only apt phrase I see for a...
beachmetro.com
Aside from clearly disliking the height and the architecture of the tower, and getting a few facts wrong along the way..............
The opinion piece has some major digressions/tirades that are very curious, essentially the author comes out in favour of a public builder here, more or less (I'm paraphrasing) because REITS/developers are evil. LOL
I don't know what @ProjectEnd ever did to this fellow..... LOL
I will say..........he does manage the odd good point, buried under a deluge of lesser ones.......
I don't know why you don't arrive at a public meeting like this, knowing the flack you're going to take, and that your strategy of 'selling' will be based in part on the need for affordable, rental housing, without at least offering a handful of units, even if you have to as asterisk beside them and say 'subject to acceptance by the City as a Community Benefit'
Lets be honest, they were going to take it on the chin over the height here regardless........but coming in w/something tangible for the community would have seemed wise.
That said, the author's polemic is rather a bit much and not particularly coherent as these things go.
FrankNF
New Member
A column in the local community newspaper (Beach Metro News) is more than a little NIMBY here. I don't throw that word around as much as some others here...........but if you read the piece you'll understand why I do here.
In My Opinion: Private profits, rental housing and the ‘monolithic’ proposal for Woodbine and Danforth – Beach Metro Community News
By ADAM SMITH In the public consultation about 985 Woodbine Ave. (at the northeast corner of Danforth Avenue), Andre D’Elia, architect from Superkul, said they “wanted to make sure that it didn’t feel monolithic”, an ironic choice of words as “monolithic” is the only apt phrase I see for a...
Aside from clearly disliking the height and the architecture of the tower, and getting a few facts wrong along the way..............
The opinion piece has some major digressions/tirades that are very curious, essentially the author comes out in favour of a public builder here, more or less (I'm paraphrasing) because REITS/developers are evil. LOL
I don't know what @ProjectEnd ever did to this fellow..... LOL
I will say..........he does manage the odd good point, buried under a deluge of lesser ones.......
View attachment 572085
I don't know why you don't arrive at a public meeting like this, knowing the flack you're going to take, and that your strategy of 'selling' will be based in part on the need for affordable, rental housing, without at least offering a handful of units, even if you have to as asterisk beside them and say 'subject to acceptance by the City as a Community Benefit'
Lets be honest, they were going to take it on the chin over the height here regardless........but coming in w/something tangible for the community would have seemed wise.
That said, the author's polemic is rather a bit much and not particularly coherent as these things go.
Maybe it's because this is just terribly written and I don't get the point, but is Adam Smith (interesting name for someone making this anti-market argument, btw) suggesting that it'd be better for renters if this had remained condo? Also, there's bad landlords out there, so let's not build purpose-built rentals? Really?!
BTW, it's not that I think that the market will solve everything, but surely only relying on public development to make up the dearth of rental inventory is pie in the sky at best.
Northern Light
Superstar
That is definitely a large part of it. Its 3 or 4 different diatribes stitched together loosely by a suspect narrative.
I have no issue with advocating for public building, but as you note, that will never be the complete story (or close); and even if it were, this site is privately owned, certainly the City could put it an offer for it...... but I doubt any price Choice would sell it at would make any sense.
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
For context, Adam Smith is a "Green Anti-Capitalist" who regularly runs in local elections in Beaches East-York... from his 2022 Councillor Election platform -A column in the local community newspaper (Beach Metro News) is more than a little NIMBY here. I don't throw that word around as much as some others here...........but if you read the piece you'll understand why I do here.
In My Opinion: Private profits, rental housing and the ‘monolithic’ proposal for Woodbine and Danforth – Beach Metro Community News
By ADAM SMITH In the public consultation about 985 Woodbine Ave. (at the northeast corner of Danforth Avenue), Andre D’Elia, architect from Superkul, said they “wanted to make sure that it didn’t feel monolithic”, an ironic choice of words as “monolithic” is the only apt phrase I see for a...
Aside from clearly disliking the height and the architecture of the tower, and getting a few facts wrong along the way..............
The opinion piece has some major digressions/tirades that are very curious, essentially the author comes out in favour of a public builder here, more or less (I'm paraphrasing) because REITS/developers are evil. LOL
I don't know what @ProjectEnd ever did to this fellow..... LOL
I will say..........he does manage the odd good point, buried under a deluge of lesser ones.......
View attachment 572085
I don't know why you don't arrive at a public meeting like this, knowing the flack you're going to take, and that your strategy of 'selling' will be based in part on the need for affordable, rental housing, without at least offering a handful of units, even if you have to as asterisk beside them and say 'subject to acceptance by the City as a Community Benefit'
Lets be honest, they were going to take it on the chin over the height here regardless........but coming in w/something tangible for the community would have seemed wise.
That said, the author's polemic is rather a bit much and not particularly coherent as these things go.
"Our planet has finite resources, yet we live in an economic system that requires infinite exponential growth or it collapses, and we keep adhering to this counter-intuitive system despite the fact it’s killing the planet. We must transition into a sustainable circular economy to secure our future, we cannot continue growing and consuming as we do. We don’t just need a change in politicians or policy, we need systems change."
Toronto Votes 2022: Ward 19 Beaches-East York Councillor candidate Adam Smith profile – Beach Metro Community News
ADAM SMITH – Ward 19 Beaches-East York candidate for Councillor I love our ward, from our beautiful beaches to our numerous ravines and parks. We’ve got great schools, great community centres, and many activities year-round. There’s no place I’d rather raise my son. I’ve been deeply involved in...
beachmetro.com
Northern Light
Superstar
For context, Adam Smith is a "Green Anti-Capitalist" who regularly runs in local elections in Beaches East-York... from his 2022 Councillor Election platform -
"Our planet has finite resources, yet we live in an economic system that requires infinite exponential growth or it collapses, and we keep adhering to this counter-intuitive system despite the fact it’s killing the planet. We must transition into a sustainable circular economy to secure our future, we cannot continue growing and consuming as we do. We don’t just need a change in politicians or policy, we need systems change."
Toronto Votes 2022: Ward 19 Beaches-East York Councillor candidate Adam Smith profile – Beach Metro Community News
ADAM SMITH – Ward 19 Beaches-East York candidate for Councillor I love our ward, from our beautiful beaches to our numerous ravines and parks. We’ve got great schools, great community centres, and many activities year-round. There’s no place I’d rather raise my son. I’ve been deeply involved in...
Funny that, there's a gist to that statement above that I want to agree with.......... I've said that I don't feel like natural contraction of the global population would be a bad thing; and I clearly prize a healthy environment.
But he seems unable to string his idea(s) together into a coherent narrative any sane person would buy.
He apparently also created his own renderings of the proposal:
PL1
Active Member
*That's* why it looked so bad! I saw this posted in my local FB group, saw who posted it, and instantly gave it reduced credence