Comment 89598

By jason (registered) | Posted June 18, 2013 at 22:26:51 in reply to Comment 89586

Compare this to the 107 Locke St proposal, a very appealing mixed use development which would be a great addition to Locke South, adding both residents and more commercial space. It won't be putting a big wall within eight feet of anyone's property, but is stalled because of people's increased concerns about the traffic it might cause.

I'm glad you shared this. I agree that any developer should want to be a great neighbour, but you kinda understand why some don't care. They could present the greatest development proposal in history and have some NIMBY group oppose it because it's not the status quo. Even if the status quo is derelict, run-down eye sores such as 220 Dundurn and 107 Locke (not saying that's the case with 220, just making the point). I wish the main building at 220 Dundurn was still planned to be 5-stories, but it makes sense for the builder to just stick with the already in place zoning for the property and avoid the headache. I imagine most folks in the area, regardless of where their backyards are, will agree that this could be a fantastic addition to the neighbourhood. And can we PLEASE get city hall to at least pretend that it's not 1970 and start allowing mixed-use development?? All the restrictions on retail is mind-boggling. Didn't Toronto already teach us this with the '2 Kings' plan?? And that was like 20 years ago.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools