560-562 Wellington St. |?| 17fl | Proposed (Auburn Developments) - Page 4

GeneralLeeTPHLS · #61 Posted **May 7, 2017, 11:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jammer139

Staff recommend declining this proposal by Auburn. They plan to change it yet again in meeting on Monday.

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/05/07/ci...n-to-the-other

I was just about to post this.

MrSlippery519 · #62 Posted **May 8, 2017, 4:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jammer139

Staff recommend declining this proposal by Auburn. They plan to change it yet again in meeting on Monday.

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/05/07/ci...n-to-the-other

It wont be long before Auburn says screw it...the amount of changes and accommodating they have done is crazy.

I am not optimistic this ever goes through.

jammer139 · #63 Posted **May 8, 2017, 11:44 PM**

If the rumours are true that Vito and Southside is working a deal with the approved proposal for Clarence St. I would suggest Auburn jump into the negotiations and try to get the project away from Southside. It already has City Hall approval but the owner is not a developer and needs to either sell or do a partnership deal to get it built.

kaiserLDN · #64 Posted **Aug 3, 2017, 4:44 PM**

A video from Auburn interviewing people about there support for the tower downtown. August 28th is councils decision about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOdA3o2sOPI

jammer139 · #65 Posted **Oct 5, 2017, 11:07 AM**

Auburn turns it attention to K-W with huge plans for the downtown there.

http://www.lfpress.com/2017/10/04/au...-redevelopment

MrSlippery519 · #66 Posted **Oct 6, 2017, 2:02 PM**

And we are still having a 9th redesign and community meeting...

I am really surprised the London proposal has not been scrapped, they have made drastic changes trying to please the community and city with little progress.

kaiserLDN · #67 Posted **Apr 30, 2018, 2:40 PM**

SMH. This is a typical London story about this project. I live and own my place downtown knowing that towers can at some point be built around me. As long as they look good I won't complain. More people living downtown will create better services, retail and restaurant's which will overall add to my neighborhood.

http://lfpress.com/news/local-news/n...-victoria-park

jammer139 · #68 Posted **May 2, 2018, 1:37 AM**

Auburn even reduced their propsoal to 17 floors.

Maybe this study will result in some good as the previous London Plan which advocated for built UP not OUT seems to have been forgotten already.

MrSlippery519 · #69 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 1:41 PM**

Maybe this should be posted in the general development discussion but it relates to Auburns building directly

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...-victoria-park

I do not really understand what the fuss is about, nothing will be built on the south side (London Life Building), the Church on the Southwest corner is not going anywhere, city hall and centennial hall same thing. So we are really looking at between Wolfe and Central (where Auburn wants to build) and between Wellington and Richmond. Many of those are Heritage designated I am sure so they are not going anywhere. Possibly the Williams building plus the 3 story at 533 Clarence could be developed.

I would like to see the Auburn development go ahead, it should have already been built to be honest. Then if Fahri ever sells or builds something new on the corner of Richmond/Central that could fit in nicely.

jammer139 · #70 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 1:58 PM**

There have been whispers that the London Life(Canada Life) parking lot on west side of current building is a future development site. Also the former St. Peters Catholic elementary school and parking lot is another future site.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSlippery519

Maybe this should be posted in the general development discussion but it relates to Auburns building directly

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...-victoria-park

I do not really understand what the fuss is about, nothing will be built on the south side (London Life Building), the Church on the Southwest corner is not going anywhere, city hall and centennial hall same thing. So we are really looking at between Wolfe and Central (where Auburn wants to build) and between Wellington and Richmond. Many of those are Heritage designated I am sure so they are not going anywhere. Possibly the Williams building plus the 3 story at 533 Clarence could be developed.

I would like to see the Auburn development go ahead, it should have already been built to be honest. Then if Fahri ever sells or builds something new on the corner of Richmond/Central that could fit in nicely.

MrSlippery519 · #71 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jammer139

There have been whispers that the London Life(Canada Life) parking lot on west side of current building is a future development site. Also the former St. Peters Catholic elementary school and parking lot is another future site.

Yes that is true I could see that parking lot getting something down the road, and yes that entire building could down the road be redeveloped I would imagine.

All of these people complaining about being in a "fishbowl" are just hilarious. A few buildings there would be amazing and would continue to add to the downtown population.

TallerIsBetter · #72 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 8:59 PM**

These people are selfish spoiled entitled weenies. All the BS about 'vistas' and balanced/human scale for the park are simply obfuscation for the fact they:

· don't like tall buildings
· don't like anything architecture other than Victorian architecture
· don't want the downtown to grow into something vibrant
· don't want their little area to be anything other than their upscale bubble.

They should all just move to Stratford

TallerIsBetter · #73 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 9:11 PM**

There was images on the CTV London news story from last week that showed drawings of the area with potential buildings and their height drawn on them for varying Density Levels. For BOTH the Medium and High Levels, they had a square tower on the plot of the St Peter's land (to the east of the Cathedral), one just north of the Cathedral on the parking lot, and two more on the London Life parking lot, just west of the main London Life building.

ALL of these were marked "~35 st." on BOTH the Medium and High Density options!!!

The only difference between the Medium and High was on the east side if the park with another ~35 st. between City Hall and Centennial Hall, and 22 st. and 17 st.-ish ones north of there up to Central. Both options had a ~16 st. on the NE corner if Richmond and Central.

The High Intensity vision would be fantastic, and would give the downtown a population that would make for a vibrant city, that would be a real destination for organizations and talant! Or we could just have Brie and Chablis and pretend we're Stratford.

Djeffery · #74 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 9:19 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TallerIsBetter

These people are selfish spoiled entitled weenies. All the BS about 'vistas' and balanced/human scale for the park are simply obfuscation for the fact they:

· don't like tall buildings
· don't like anything architecture other than Victorian architecture
· don't want the downtown to grow into something vibrant
· don't want their little area to be anything other than their upscale bubble.

They should all just move to Stratford

On the other hand, I can't imagine anybody really looking forward to high rises on the next block from where they live either. Hell, even people that move into high rises are nimby about another high rise going up nearby (Renaissance residents). I find most of the time that people who tell people in potential high rise areas to "suck it up", don't actually live in areas with much of a chance of a high rise going up near them.

TallerIsBetter · #75 Posted **Apr 30, 2019, 9:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djeffery

I find most of the time that people who tell people in potential high rise areas to "suck it up", don't actually live in areas with much of a chance of a high rise going up near them.

Except in Toronto?? Happens all the time there. At some point people need to shed any illision that they are entitled by the universe to their particular view and deal with it. Anyone with any concerns needs to do due diligence and fully investigate and consider the potential for any new building down the road.

There are spots you can go where there is zero chance of ever losing your view (say, The Harrison). Don't take what the real estate agent or property manger says on faith, lol.

Or, move to the new building!! 8^)

jammer139 · #76 Posted **May 1, 2019, 2:36 PM**

These NIMBY's are like children who don't have a clue about the real world in which they live. Best to give them a lollipop, pat on the head and told to run along while the adults discuss adult issues.

jammer139 · #77 Posted **May 8, 2019, 1:00 AM**

Another group has a different perspective on Victoria Park development.

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...lopment-infill

It appears the first group does not speak for everyone. Reminds me of the SOHO group.

MrSlippery519 · #78 Posted **May 8, 2019, 1:48 PM**

The city per usual will drag its feet and developers will look elseware or to another city. I absolutely value the opinions of people in the area as well as heritage designated properties but this is just getting out of hand.

At some point the city needs to just put out a statement and move on. Either approve it or don't, I am shocked that the Auburn group has been so diligent changing the design, stories, etc over and over again to try and compromise.

jammer139 · #79 Posted **Jun 13, 2019, 10:14 PM**

Well said that a tiny minority "squeaky wheels" are trying to claim they speak for the majority. aka NIMBY's

https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...raw-opposition

jammer139 · #80 Posted **Sep 4, 2019, 10:47 AM**

Public mtg tonite - https://lfpress.com/news/local-news/...wl-expert-says