Toronto Massey Tower Condos | 206.95m | 60s | MOD Developments | Hariri Pontarini

In light of this awesome news and our (possible) role in it (courtesy of I42):

[video=youtube;04854XqcfCY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04854XqcfCY[/video]

(Just substitute "Toronto" for "the world" and "NIMBYs" for "losers"):cool:
 
Last edited:
Okay, time to make a correction: I have had this clarified now (it happened really quickly at the end)

Kristyn Wong-Tam proposed modifications to the planners recommendations and asked them to bring forth draft by-laws to the May 14th Community Council meeting that will allow this project to proceed… it was not just a simple deferral. In the meantime, as mentioned before, Section 37 benefits are still to be nailed down, and I imagine that will include acknowledgment of the Massey Hall grant of land of course.

In the meantime, some responses to the above, and some reflections:

I'm glad to have gone. This was the first time that I have deputed at a Toronto-East York Community Council on UT's behalf. (I have deputed before at Etobicoke-York Council on my own behalf.) I have spoken before at Community Consultation meetings on UT's behalf. I only do it when a project is particularly important to me or if I feel it is to UT as a whole. I don't pretend that we have unanimity on UT on any project, but I was confident in saying today that the vast majority of UT readers are for this particular project.

We are pretty well received at the events. I think that Councillors are glad to hear about projects that are supported by the members of the community; they certainly hear enough from those opposed. (There was nobody who spoke in opposition to Massey Tower, BTW, unlike for 89 Avenue Road this morning where everyone who spoke was against it, and the proponents didn't even bother to show.)

KWT is way smarter than the people who simply brand her as anti-development think she is, and in general most of the City's politicians are worthy of more respect in that regard. Same with the Planning Department. Planning did what they had to here: this project does not fit the mould, and as they must work within the framework set out by the rules, they pretty much had to come to this meeting with a refusal recommendation. Their recommendations, BTW, do not necessarily reflect their own feelings about a project. Anyway, the process worked here: as I stated above, Planning is now responding to Community Council's wishes and will present draft bylaws to be debated in the spring by Council so that this development can proceed.

I am sure that's what would have happened had UT showed up or not, but like I said, I believe the Councillors are glad to have us show up to voice our support nevertheless. I do not think that Mr. Switzer took what happened today for granted. It did not appear that he had been promised in advance "don't worry, don't worry, the fix is in". There was no smugness nor flippancy in his presentation. It's a complicated project, but people (other than CN Tower) seem to get why it's good - - - very good.

42
 
Last edited:
re: fanboys - A lot of the folks on UT, myself included, joined merely due to an interest in our current building boom. Whether or not we identified as skyscraper fanboys varies person to person, but one thing is fact. Most of us learn to appreciate architecture and the other urban issues documented on this site. When I first joined UT, I was just another excited average joe with a camera who wanted a bit more info about a construction project, knowing nothing about construction, real estate, urban planning etc,. Since then UT has become a second home and taught me everything I know about the growth and issues surrounding our city. So where you see a fanboy, I see a malleable mind with an interest they are yet to fully understand, as I once was.

re: Massey - All of us who support the Massey Tower proposal should take the time to thank i42, who spoke on behalf of Urban Toronto's many Massey supporters at City Hall today. Also thanks to Kristyn Wong-Tam for keeping an open mind to this amazing proposal. Glad to have been there.
 
I don't quite understand this idea perpetrated by some on UT that KWT is "anti-development" - as someone heavily involved in the development industry I can categorically state that she is not “anti-development” – she is pretty balanced (and can be very tough at times) in working through the process and perhaps I’d suggest at times a little overwhelmed with the sheer volume of substantial applications in communities throughout her ward.
 
Gotta love the KWT love-fest in this thread. She said "maybe" (technically, she didn't even go that far) to a project that anyone who loves Toronto would approve in a heartbeat. Yay! Good for her. She spoke out against the development of that parking garage immediately to show her "concern" for loss of parking, and yet she remained completely silent about Massey. She did the bare minimum, so I don't see a reason to give her credit for anything. Had she acknowledged the merits of this projects before the meeting and said something more concrete today, I would've been more impressed. As it stands, she''s still an anti-development, parking lot promoting councillor. :)
 
Thank you i42 for taking the time to do this today and represent the majority who support Massey Tower here, it's a project that is very worthy in my opinion and MOD is a promising developer. Thank you also for acknowledging what many of us already know who have spoken to or been to meetings with Councillor Wong-Tam, namely that she is not anti-development but that she balances her massive portfolio of developments in her Ward in a very thoughtful and transparent manner.
 
DtTO said:
Gotta love the KWT love-fest in this thread. She said "maybe" (technically, she didn't even go that far) to a project that anyone who loves Toronto would approve in a heartbeat. Yay! Good for her. She spoke out against the development of that parking garage immediately to show her "concern" for loss of parking, and yet she remained completely silent about Massey. She did the bare minimum, so I don't see a reason to give her credit for anything. Had she acknowledged the merits of this projects before the meeting and said something more concrete today, I would've been more impressed. As it stands, she''s still an anti-development, parking lot promoting councillor. :)
Click to expand...

We've been through this already with the Yorkville parking lot. A parking lot promoting Councillor... you did your silly agenda no favours with that comment. I invite you to meet me over in a KWT thread and have a serious, factual debate.
 
interchange42 said:
Kristyn Wong-Tam proposed modifications to the planners recommendations and asked them to bring forth draft by-laws to the May 14th Community Council meeting that will allow this project to proceed… it was not just a simple deferral. In the meantime, as mentioned before, Section 37 benefits are still to be nailed down, and I imagine that will include acknowledgment of the Massey Hall grant of land of course.
Click to expand...

All great news 42, and THANK YOU, SIR, for attending.....just curious, did it seem that the councilors and planners are aware of UT? It would be great to know that they visit this site, even if anonymously.....sometimes I get the feeling that the only perspective they get is from NIMBYs..
 
someMidTowner said:
re: fanboys - A lot of the folks on UT, myself included, joined merely due to an interest in our current building boom. Whether or not we identified as skyscraper fanboys varies person to person, but one thing is fact. Most of us learn to appreciate architecture and the other urban issues documented on this site. When I first joined UT, I was just another excited average joe with a camera who wanted a bit more info about a construction project, knowing nothing about construction, real estate, urban planning etc,. Since then UT has become a second home and taught me everything I know about the growth and issues surrounding our city. So where you see a fanboy, I see a malleable mind with an interest they are yet to fully understand, as I once was.
Click to expand...

Great sentiment sMT. I believe what frustrates most elder members isn't necessarily that there are more and more new faces around UT, it's that some of those new faces quickly and vocally outwear their welcome with myopia, false-suspicion and relentless intransigence. In fact, see below:

DtTO said:
Gotta love the KWT love-fest in this thread. She said "maybe" (technically, she didn't even go that far) to a project that anyone who loves Toronto would approve in a heartbeat. Yay! Good for her. She spoke out against the development of that parking garage immediately to show her "concern" for loss of parking, and yet she remained completely silent about Massey. She did the bare minimum, so I don't see a reason to give her credit for anything. Had she acknowledged the merits of this projects before the meeting and said something more concrete today, I would've been more impressed. As it stands, she''s still an anti-development, parking lot promoting councillor. :)
Click to expand...

After all we've read here and on the front page, that you'd post something like: "she''s still an anti-development, parking lot promoting councillor" [sic] and still expect your opinion to hold any weight in any thread is stunning. That said, perhaps my assumption that you actually did read any of it is misplaced.

dt_toronto_geek said:
We've been through this already with the Yorkville parking lot. A parking lot promoting Councillor... you did your silly agenda no favours with that comment. I invite you to meet me over in a KWT thread and have a serious, factual debate.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't bait the troll, you already know you'd win.
 
interchange42 said:
Okay, so, Gary Switzer just deputed to the Community Council…

and then I did, to let Council know what UrbanToronto thinks about this (and I didn't say you all like it, just nearly all of you)

and Kristyn Wong-Tam has just told the Council that this is a "very good proposal for the city", and…

she has asked for a deferral of the final vote until May 14 when the Section 37 package has been worked out…

and Passed.

42
Click to expand...

Good work Interchange! Thank you for taking the time out today to represent all the supporters of this wonderful project, Massey Tower, and for being the voice of UT community.
 
Thank you folks. And thank you 42 for acknowledging that our Planning dept is completely overwhelmed and that they have massive constraints as bureaucrats and that they have to abide by rules and the Planning Act regardless of their personal opinions.

The amount of people that are involved in the development process is staggering. Land development is not for the faint of heart or those that give up easily. I have a ton of respect for developers and City Planners. Often the decisions that they make are based on practicality.

As someone who loves and promotes high-rise living in the City, I tend to ignore most negative comments about "greedy" developers or "boring" architecture in Toronto. Yes, we do have grey and green glass and spandrel panels used excessively...but the reality is that unique and avant-garde type architecture is really hard to sell in this City. Blame that on our British protestant heritage. Just go to London, England to see how similar it feels to Toronto. We aren't Paris. We aren't NYC. We aren't Rome. We are Toronto. It's a relatively new City in the world. And people feel comfortable buying a grey box.

Some buildings are going to blend in and be "boring" and that's okay. The gorgeous buildings will be winners and will stick out and that's great. This condo tower is unique enough to be interesting and yet conservative enough to sell. Plus, it does a fantastic job of restoring and integrating a beautiful historic building in the process.

Win-win. People shouldn't panic. It's likely to be approved.
 
yyzer said:
All great news 42, and THANK YOU, SIR, for attending.....just curious, did it seem that the councilors and planners are aware of UT? It would be great to know that they visit this site, even if anonymously.....sometimes I get the feeling that the only perspective they get is from NIMBYs..
Click to expand...

You (and everyone else, cheers!) are welcome. In terms of taking time out of my day… well, it was my day*. Not so indirectly, you all make it possible that I am able to go. We're not going to show up for every project, but when it feels really important… you do what you need to do! As has been said in several threads now: UT readers should be going to community consultation meetings in the evenings when they can. If you care about a project, pro or con, or if you want some changes, go tell them!

In terms of awareness of UT, yes a good percentage of the Councillors know who we are. Nearly every Councillor has a staff person who knows who we are, and all of them, both Councillors and staff, know us in the wards that are under significant development pressure.

In some cases we are seen rather one-dimensionally as a pro-development "never seen a building we didn't like" kind of site, but that's too simplistic, no? The truth is more complex than that and I am trying to spread the word in that regard. More than anything I let people know that there are a lot of people out there who care about how Toronto develops, and that they tend to congregate on UT.

42


*There's WiFi at City Hall, so I did get some more traditional work done there too!
 
Interchange, you certainly are an:

Urban+Champion+0.JPG
 
This is way off topic, but I would love to get a better understanding of this.

Interchange, your full time job is UT right? Exactly how big is the UT office employee wise? I am under the understanding that at least you and "Edward skira" are full tie employees, with somemidtowner also working there?? I would love to get to know exactly who on these boards are employed by them, and I have been wondering for quite some time. Maybe a separate post in the off topic discussion boards would best fit this rather than here.

And I also thank you for attending today!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top