City election puts Church-Gloucester 25-storey development on hold
TORONTO NEWS / Kyle Rae opposed original proposal; BIA hasn't committed
Allison Martell / Toronto / Thursday, July 22, 2010
Share |

The rezoning application for a proposed condo development at Church and Gloucester is on hold until after the municipal election, but that hasn’t slowed discussion around the project. Major players in the Village aren’t exactly lining up to support Church 18 Holdings, the developers whose 25-storey tower would replace a cluster of heritage and rental buildings.

The newly minted Gloucester Residents’ Association will hold a public meeting at The 519 on July 29 at 8pm. Organizers say that Lisa McCann, one of the owners, has promised to attend.

In the meantime, a planned meeting between the developers and the board of the Church Wellesley Village BIA has been rescheduled, and according to manager David Wootton, the BIA has not yet taken a position on the development, or indeed decided whether it will take a position at all.

Ward 27 candidate Kristyn Wong-Tam, who is working with the Residents’ Association, is critical of both the project and the City’s handling of it. Her opponent Ken Chan has apparently met with the developers himself and released an open letter encouraging them to meet with local residents, tenants and businesses ahead of the City’s official consultations. Reached for comment, outgoing councillor Kyle Rae seemed eager to distance himself from the project.

“I had been in meetings with the applicant about a year ago, and I made it clear to them that I didn’t think the project was suitable,” he says, outlining concerns with rental housing, scale and heritage properties. Rae won’t comment on the revised plans in the rezoning application, saying that he isn’t familiar with them.

(Google Streetview)
Connie Langille of the Residents’ Association, who recently met with the developers, suggests that Church 18 Holdings is out of touch with the community.

“Elliot [Sud, the other owner] described north of us here as ‘scary,’ and I challenged him on that,” she says. “I raised my three children here; it’s a beautiful community. He’s in North York, so I think he has a different perception.”

In a preliminary report on the rezoning application in late May, city planners highlighted 23 issues to be resolved.

“We have concerns with the height, with the density, with the heritage treatment and with the rental demolition and conversion,” says Willie Macrae, the planner on the file. Macrae notes in particular that city policies and bylaws are designed to discourage the destruction of rental property by making it expensive.

“We have strict policies within our official plan that speak to rental replacement, which means that you have to provide the same amount of housing, the same unit type, the same rental cost,” says Macrae. At the city’s discretion, developers can also be on the hook for tenants’ moving costs and more.

For most local residents, news that their homes could be torn down came as a shock. Some were upset to learn that the developers had been meeting privately with planning staff over the last year. Macrae says that preliminary meetings are common practice.

“We’re trying to get an application to come in more refined,” he says. “We don’t want to waste the public’s time with something that isn’t approvable.”

Now that an application has been filed, the next step is to hold public consultations or more detailed public working group meetings. Macrae says that he needs council direction to do that.

“The councillor [Kyle Rae] has indicated that he doesn’t want this application to be an election issue, so he doesn’t want to hold a formal consultation until after the election. That’s not my decision, that’s council’s decision, but I have to abide by that,” says Macrae.

Rae characterizes the decision to delay consultations somewhat differently.

“The staff at the community council told people that there is a protocol that when a councillor is not running again, they tend to wait until after” the election to schedule consultations, he says. The idea, presumably, is to make sure that the same councillor is at both consultations and council discussions. Rae couldn’t recall the name of the staff person who had told him that this delay was standard practice.

But Alan Slobodsky, a consultant working with Church 18 Holdings, makes it sound like the delay was the developers’ initiative.

“We don’t want to become a political football, right?” he says. Slobodsky defended the project, but repeatedly emphasized that substantial changes can be made to the plans.

“This is a year, 18-months, two-year process,” he says. “We’re looking forward to community consultations.”


In the meantime, Macrae encourages residents to contact him directly with questions or concerns. He can be reached at 416-392-7572.


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Of course he's distancing himself
Rae also distanced himself from the St. Mary's project last fall, and then voted in favour much to their anger and shock. Talk to the Bay Street Residents Association for help in understanding this process since they've dealt with a lot of it and been screwed over royally by the secret dealmaking process. Since he carries on secret talks with the developers at all stages, including discussion of Section 37 community benefits, you won't necessarily know in advance what proposed amendments the developer will make and of course there is the negotiation that will take place to get extra height/massing. My guess is that the distancing isn't so much about opposing but in not wanting to take the heat for something he won't be around to see the end of. Until he's gone, he ought to be coming clean about what talks have gone on with the developer up to this point. Prospective candidates should contact him for a full briefing on the goings-on so far. Look for any difference between what Rae is saying and the staff report. Contact planning for copies of all documentation so far. At all stages, get in writing what you can. Make it clear to prospective candidates that you want the neighbourhood to be part of the negotiation including community benefits; if you can't get the massing or height limited (and you may not want to if it's designed properly) you can at least get them to provide some kind of neighbourhood compensation. In the past, Rae and others have used this for bragging rights - "I got Developer X to provide $35K for a splash pad/dog run" etc. Strip the power for that from the councillor and bring it back to the neighbourhood. This stuff has been overly centralized and Rae has been immensely hostile to community consultation on Section 37. It is exciting that this might get to change.
Alex MacLean, Toronto ON
07/22/10 5:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Growth can be GOOD ....
From what I see, the area bordered by Queen St up to Bloor St and Parliament St over to Avenue Rd is very under developed compared to other major cities. This area is littered with small 2 - 6 storey buildings that take up land but with the value of land going upwards, these small building don't generate enough taxes for the city and definiatly don't house enough people to meet the demand as the population grows. So in fact what ends up happening is that there's less and less condos and basic apartments on the market for people that either want or have to rent. What this does is allow landlords to do as little up-keep & much needed renovations in their buildings. Another thing a shortage of rental units does, is INCREASE RENTS. So why the area's BIA and people like Connie Langille would be against development that would not only help local businesses and help in keeping rents level somewhat reasonable and force landlords to maintain their buildings is beyond me. I guess I;m going to have to get personally involved in the Village much more so that candidates Wong-Tam & Ken Chan fully understand that there actually is business owners and Village residents that want to see development in the neighbourhood. Development doesn't have to be a dirty word. Fact is, there's much of Toronto that has basically been left to rot and I for one welcome renewal and development to so Toronto continue to grow and in fact catch up with other big cities in North America. As for Kyle Rae, from what I've seen over the last 2.5 years, Kyle's been quietly collecting a health pay cheque, travelling, and generally setting himself up for a very nice retirement. In my humble opinion, Kyle Rae is the best poster child for a referendum on Term Limits for city of Toronto politicians.
Jeff Taylor, Toronto Ontario
07/23/10 1:47 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Thunderous applause for Jeff
Actually, the pay cheque isn't that healthy, Jeff, according to the actual councillor himself: "My constituents think I am underpaid," the Toronto Centre-Rosedale councillor said yesterday. "They can't believe I am doing the job at this wage." Kyle Rae, reported in various media including Globe and CBC, May 17, 2005. That was before a series of pay raises and COLA increases, however. I guess $100K is just barely enough, because $90K wasn't. Most of us scrape by on less than half of that without bitching to the media. So I second your nomination: Kyle Rae - the best reason in the world for term limits. After a couple of terms, the entitlement is stifling. If you can't make your mark in eight years, maybe you're in the wrong career path. His first decade he made a positive contribution, but the declining returns in the second were quite startling. I mean, he spent the garbage strike in Spain and missed the vote to end it. He's been absent from a wide range of Toronto issues that could have used some leadership. He's been a seat warmer, and perhaps worst of all, contributed to the brewing backlash that has vaulted a rube like Rob Ford to the front of the pack in liberal, urban Toronto. That's no mean feat.
Karla Marx, Toronto ON
07/23/10 4:02 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Yes, he really is a Pig
Dear Karla Marx, don't just blame Kyle Rae for the LEFT's on-coming fall. There's tons of blame to go around at city hall - starting at the top with mayor David Miller. Kyle Rae has been just collecting a pay cheque for several years now, BUT the same could be said for about 60 percent of the other seat warmers over there at city hall. It will take about 2 to 4 years to fix the mess that Miller & company will leave the next mayor to clean up. One thing further I'd say about Kyle Rae though, he sure must have BIG BALLS to be able to say the things he says about himself and still look in the mirror every morning without throwing up on himself. P.S. you forgot to mention Rae's $12,000 going away party he threw himself outside his riding which tax payers got to pay for. How many trees planted, benches installed, or garbage containers could $12,000 buy for his downtown riding ?
Jeff Taylor, Toronto Ontario
07/23/10 8:59 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Miller-Rae-Giambrone-Pantelone
It's no wonder the right is picking up steam across Toronto. Rob Ford's voting record is actually much more in line with what most Torontonians would deem acceptable. You can find it here: > (not my blog). The Miller wing of Counsil that includes our very own Kyle Rae has a shameful record on spending and management of city money and city services. The Miller-Rae clan votes to up their pay to $97,000 a year, but won't pick up trash in our parks or install new benches. The Miller-Rae clan have increased TTC fares but not improved service, only cosmetic changes that are barely noticed. They support unions who hold the city hostage and constantly demand higher wages. They have done absolutely nothing to keep thugs and crackheads off our streets and out of our parks. G20 was the exception, I almost never see cops walking the beat anymore. I can think of few accomplishments of the Miller era. They have won the gay vote by telling us how great we are and showing up to our parties, what a joke! When he's not absent from votes or rushing to the scene to get some free press (like when that building collapsed on Yonge St last spring), Kyle Rae is all about postponing progress, idling, spending, waffling, and celebrating faux successes. They gripe about things falling apart but do nothing to build anew, they've spent their budget on pork and PR. Such behavior now dominates city hall. No wonder there is a backlash lead by the right wing. Our neighbourhood is in decay. We need new development, not manufactured outrage. The Village needs new housing and new people to support local business. Allowing our neighbourhood to become a slum is not going to preserve our cultural heritage or strengthen our community. This is one tower. Housing in the village is substandard. What is all the fuss about?? More condos = less Money Marts. Time to break ground!
Ryan, Toronto ON
07/24/10 10:19 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Condos no magic pill for poverty
More condos = less Money Marts, says Ryan. So built form determines poverty? Could you explain that equation? Building condos doesn't eradicate poverty, it simply pushes those without financial means to other parts of the city. In order to buy the condos, you have to have money. This gentrification is simply pushing the bubble around under the wallpaper. It has a head-in-the-sand appeal, to be sure. But I certainly don't want to live in a neighbourhood that is comprised solely of condos, which seems to be the way we are going. The St. Lawrence model of mixed forms and income seems to work quite well. Of the different Toronto neighbourhoods I've live in, it's the most appealing as someone of middle income who prefers a diverse neighbourhood. Condos are part of the mix, but they aren't a solution to social problems, unless you like the vertical suburb approach.
Karla Marx, Toronto ON
07/25/10 4:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
WOW !
Hey Ryan, I have no idea who you are, but your comments are not only the most realistic, honest, and intelligent I've read regarding the state & condition of the Village since I moved here almost 3 years ago. I wish I had written them. People in this city seem to be in total denial when it comes to actually seeing what's happening (or not happening) to their city. After 3 years, I still can't get used to the dirty TTC stations or the posters & graffiti all over everything that's within reaching distance. I don't know who's running the Village's BIA, but they need to get all the businesses together to do a major spring cleaning every year - starting with power washing the sidewalks, post, poles, fences, stairwells, etc through-out the Village. Stopping businesses like St. Marc's Spa from plastering the area with posters would also go a long way to making the Village way more eye appealing.
Jeff Taylor, Toronto Ontario
07/25/10 7:34 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
What does development have to do wiith postering?
I'm not understanding the logic here, Jeff and Ryan. Literally dozens of condos have gone up in Ward 27 in the last few years and the problems you are talking about - filthy streets, etc - are, by your own admission, worse than ever. This is an article about a development proposal. What does the failure of the BIA have to do with it? If there is a link please make it.
Karla Marx, Toronto ON
07/26/10 7:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
what is postering?
Karla the area commonly known as the Village is about 1/5 of Ward 27, and has seen little condo development in recent years. That giant one on Jarvis and Charles isn't completed yet. All the ones that have gone up near the Sherbourne/Dundas area (the most troublesome intersection of downtown) have had little impact in turning that neighbourhood around, so no it isn't always a simple equation. But the Village has alot more to offer, it's relative safety being one important factor (especially for young female professionals, who make up a significant chunk of the condo-buying market). Whereas residents near Sherbourne and Dundas don't want to go outside at night, residents in the Village do. Sadly our housing situation in the neighbourhood, pre-1980 apartment towers and mid-century lowrises, mostly in the $850-1100 range, isn't very attractive to potential tenants and property owners with a higher income. No I am not one of those people. But they are out there and it would be stupid to see the Village in ruin when positive new growth is in reach. I'm not suggesting tearing down everything and replacing them with glass towers. But let's accomodate a healthy level of growth, and maybe it would give the community an economic leg-up. It hasn't been a great year for servers and bartenders in the Village, some new neighbours with a steady income would be very welcome. That's all I'm saying. I know Toronto will always have its dregs and there's no magic pill to eradicate that, but c'mon let's even the playing field a little bit. Some morning I look around and feel like I'm in a zombie movie.
Ryan, Toronto ON
07/26/10 9:39 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
ooh, postering!
Jeff have you seen that bulletin board sign they put up in front of the Pizza Pizza on Wellelsey? I think it's an attempt to stop all the postering of lampposts. I actually don't mind the sexy colourful posters I find them charming. But I see your point. For me it's the perma-grime on the sidewalks and buildings that turn me right off. The Village truly stinks. Ok, I'm just babbling now, but remember last summer during the garbage strike when a group of model citizens really cleaned the place up good?? That's the kind of thing I'd like to see more of. A community based effort to WASH AWAY THE STINK!!
Ryan, Toronto ON
07/26/10 9:53 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Community
I don't think Rae is as left as people believe him to be. Don't forget he's supporting Ken Chan and George Smitherman. He has become what fear in politicans and turn his back on the community.Kristyn Wong Tam has made some difference on Church street but not enough. I think I"m going to have to agree Jeff and join the BIA because I"m afraid nobody will represent the community. Lets all pray that whoever is going to be councillor won't be Kyle Rae.
Bob, toronto ontario
07/28/10 4:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Hasta la vista baby
Kyle Rae can't really be trusted on anything since he'll vacillate depending on his political needs du jour. Remember when he switched his support from Barbara Hall to David Miller on the basis that John Tory was too frightening a prospect? John Tory isn't looking too bad these days considering what else is on offer is he. Rae has been caught outright lying and dabbling in the black arts of truthiness so many times, I wouldn't believe him about the weather. If he said it was nice out, I'll pack my umbrella. Take note: These ones who totally oversell their frankness and supposed plain speaking are the ones to watch out for most. I worked on his first campaign,him and John Campey, and I thought he was going to go places - our guy! I think that was in 1990 or thereabouts. I was so ecstatic when we put him in office. I thought we had a real good guy, but he's turned out to be more self-serving than just about anyone who's ever been at the city hall. He always turns any story back to being about him, and in a favourable light. Predictably. I became tired of hearing the same hackneyed stuff. He should of retired ten years ago, after two or three terms. Twenty years is obcene. It's like everyone else left the dinner party @ 10:30 and now it's 1:15 a.m. and he's still there telling war stories about himself! We get it already! You da man! Yes Rae, Ghandi, Mandela and King. Carved into a rock in South Dakota. Right? Don't forget your hat motherfucker. And don't come back.
Avi Weinrib, Toronto ON
07/30/10 10:57 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Middle ground
I live (and pay taxes) in the area, and would like to see more apropos development happening. The townhouse development on (I think) Maitland (or one of those streets down there) seemed perfect: kept a neighbourhood feel, increased density and looks nice. When people speak of increasing density, it seems they immediately go to massive condo complexes, which only serve to increase property taxes and smother neighbourhoods. Instead of being greedy, moderate increases in density would allow the city to keep some character while encouraging families to stay downtown.
Serafin, Toronto Ont
08/01/10 1:04 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.