Paul Y
800 comments on Parks? Trees? Culture? Maybe . . . as a way to market this plan. It is not endorsed by our elected representatives or City planning staff. It will go forward as a Ministerial Zoning Order (see staff report - top of pg 2). LINK: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/ph/bgrd/backgroundfile-168262.pdf The province is giving the developer a massive re-zoning and we/the City are left out. The consultants and developer are here short-term. We can take up valuable time asking about public space, affrdble housing, parks, trees and culture however, without the City planning process there are no agreements and no reasons I can see why a developer (partnered with the Premier) would spend on these extras. Cadillac Fairview (owned by the Teachers Pension Fund btw) will maximize profit for share holders regardless of what we add to this list of opinions. We have no power. And yes we have a huge affordability crisis in Toronto but from my experience living here since mid 80's simply building more condos has never resulted in affordability. Public funding (from development charges etc.) and/or development agreements have. Where I live, a family shelter was integrated into a condo because the Councillor and staff worked with the developer and made it a condition for approval. Will this developer funded consulting team figure out how to ensure the developer provides what the City planners and Elected reps would have demanded? Don't think so. Look at who has the power.

You have all gone for the bait and switch, discussing final design issues which will be ignored, while the addition of res to this development serves one purpose - to confer to the developer a gift worth close to $1 billion in future profits, without any disclosure of what the public gets in return, and without any regard for planning issues - especially traffic associated with 6,000 new residents (one new intersection at Broadview and Lakeshore and improvements at Don Roadway, but no new highway off ramps to the east, so nothing to cope with 6,000 residents and the 'promise' of 10 million square feet of office). Meanwhile the existing neighbourhood and City taxpayers will bear the brunt of this and the above ground subway, which facilitates a little extra space on the site for these residential units. Hired hacks are used to poison public meetings with comments like "don't worry about those entitled existing local residents". Who to consider then? The wealthy developer interests who live elsewhere? The only real issue here is why is the Ford Government dictating this neighbourhood design? Is the City government of Toronto irrelevant? Cornwall has more power.

While these concerns are appropriate, keep in mind that the residential density is not about creating beautiful spaces - it's about giving the developer $5 b worth of density to sell and about $800m worth of profit (yes an $800m gift! Merry Christmas) that can be realized quickly in the condo market - vs the expected slow uptake for commercial space. Getting back a few meeting spaces and park benches is total chump change - even a contribution to the GO station (how much can a GO station without parking cost, really?) is likely to be peanuts in comparison. The negative impact on traffic will outshine any 'mixed use' development benefits.

Someone who lives close by

If the site can accommodate an extra 5 or 6 thousand residents (without any planning), it can surely accommodate and easement to put the subway underground at Booth.

Transit & Transportation

Generally interested in the project