Undead
Senior Member
More optimism from @Amare. Previously, @Northern Light documented this rarest of phenomena. A special day this is.
No pedestrian bridge over the rail corridor?
Could be a side effect of what happens when you recover from the mild effects of Covid even when fully vaccinated.More optimism from @Amare. Previously, @Northern Light documented this rarest of phenomena. A special day this is.
Theretically this could be done I agree, but having easy access to the other side of the rail corridor should be allowed at all points in the day/night. Not only just when Metrolinx tells the community they can or cant.The GO Station is (currently) immediately adjacent to this site; at least during station hours, I imagine one could use the tunnels under the platforms for that purpose. Not the most aesthetically pleasing connection, but that's a cheap fix.
One could easily elegantly tile/muralize and illuminate those tunnels for under 100k per tunnel, which is a small fraction of what a new bridge would cost.
What are the implications of this heading to the Ontario Land Tribunal? (I'm a novice so would love to know)I am told that this one is headed to the OLT.
Can't see an open file on the E-Status yet, but presumably that is coming.
What are the implications of this heading to the Ontario Land Tribunal? (I'm a novice so would love to know)
Thanks Northern Light! So there is a sticking point that the city and the proponent are unable to settle.In theory, almost anything could happen, ranging from the OLT refusing the appeal (development, as proposed, denied), to accepting it as proposed in full. The OLT may also, through mediation, attempt to help the City and the proponent arrive
at a compromise.
***
All that said, my understanding of what's at issue, I believe, will favour the applicant here. I have not, in fairness, seen the City's case; but I suspect they have an uphill battle on their hands.
For greater clarity, We will need to see the agreed upon issues list at the OLT, which will be public, in due course.
Sometimes a developer appeals to the OLT just so that they can get a date to get things settled, as an upcoming hearing puts pressure on the City to get their side of things worked out. Not saying that's the case here, I don't know, but just saying that unless you know for sure that there are disputes over some things, in some cases it's just the City not getting everything reviewed as quickly as the developer would like.Thanks Northern Light! So there is a sticking point that the city and the proponent are unable to settle.
This development seems to be a positive development plan (to a novice such as myself) so I am curious to see what the dispute is.
Cheers.
The OPA and zoning is being settled at with the city - https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2024.CC14.10
If 685 Warden is any indication, this will likely be approved around the 5 FSI range.
Confidential attachment not yet made public.
It should get adopted by council next week. Ordinarily, that would turn a formal OLT hearing into a settlement hearing (if all the lawyers/witnesses are ready) - which should wrap up in a matter of hours since it does not look like there is any major opposition to this anymore.Should this not be approved; an 18-day hearing is scheduled for March 5th.
I imagine @RepublicDevelopments can't comment on this just yet, but I will bring it to their attention anyway.
It should get adopted by council next week. Ordinarily, that would turn a formal OLT hearing into a settlement hearing (if all the lawyers/witnesses are ready) - which should wrap up in a matter of hours since it does not look like there is any major opposition to this anymore.
Very true, especially with a new councilor for the ward like Parthi. I doubt he will fiddle with anything this late in the game. But he has been known to do some strange thingsI agree; just thought I would add the additional info.
Also, a surprise on the floor of Council is not unknown.