On the February 28th Council agenda there is a report providing an update to applications related to a development on east side of Keele between Elizabeth Grove and Clearview Crescent. The applications include amendments to the King City Community Plan and the Schomberg & King City Urban Areas By law; also there is a site plan application. This application is under appeal at the Ontario Land Tribunal; hence the Council is not the approver. After the February 28 public Council meeting at which deputations can be made and Council can ask questions Council and Staff will have a closed Council meeting in which Council will give direction to Planning and Legal staff for the upcoming hearing at the OLT on May 2nd. There is so much that is wrong with the proposal; very unfortunately the only opportunity is to make it not as bad as it could be.
Since the first application in 20 17 I have been critical of the plan of the proposal to be one long building running alongside Keele. That design is offensive given the streetscape north of the development area which features mostly well maintained heritage homes and trees. Over the years the plan has only become worse as the proposal has more stories. Its architecture would not be surprising if it were located at Steeles close to the 404 although undoubtedly it would be higher there. The development proposes that on the east side of the property there should be a dog run and an outdoor amenity area; I cannot imagine that being a pleasing place to spend anytime. Some of the key opportunities for improvement (i.e. to be not as bad as it could be) is fewer stories, addressing the lack of outdoor space and incorporation of true green development standards
Even at the beginning of this application there was opposition and great concern about the degree of intensification. I did have concerns too given the fact that there are established homes in the area. Given this reality, building the right thing is very important. Furthermore, there is the fact that what is allowed to be built here will influence what happens across the street and in other areas of King City. Intensification greater than what King has seen before is appropriate given the GO train station, a few minutes walk away from this project. But the possible six stories is too much.
I am also disappointed that there is lack of definition of green development features. There needs to be more than EV charging stations and solar ready roofs. There needs to be high energy conservation features for example.
As always deputations can be made or emailed comments can be sent. For either contact clerks@king.ca by noon on Monday, February 28.
This development does sound to be inappropriate. I am surprised by your comment in the last sentence of the 1st paragraph, “very unfortunately the only opportunity is to make it not as bad as it could be”. It seems to me that the objective of the Township at the Ontario Land Tribunal for this application ahould be to deny this application. Failing that, then “to make it not as bad as it could be”. So the presentation from the lawyers could be two fold, the application is too bad and should be denied, but if the chair rejects that idea, then here are the changes that need to be made… Let us not give up before the hearing!
Good point Nancy. I could not agree more.
Hi Debbie
Perhaps council should go to the
Province and ask them to change the name of King City to Condo City!….this is based on what I believe to be 6 condo buildings currently at various stages of development.
Don Eyles
I don’t know if this is what you were concerned about but your comment stimulates me to say that I do regret that we have not been successful in having the new buildings to be rental units; our housing diversity is very lacking.
Thanks, Debbie, for some common sense. We could use a lot more of that from others. Unfortunately, many in King City are not aware of this and won’t be until the digging starts. Only those of us who live closest to the proposal know what’s in store for the village. I can remember a time when the local paper sent a representative to all council meetings and that way information was shared.
The King Weekly Sentinel does monitor Council meetings and there are often articles reviewing reports/discussion. I assume that there were articles when the application was at Council but the issue is that it has only been at Council a couple times and it has been awhile since the last time. Having said that there is the perpetual challenge of getting people to be interested in what is happening beyond their backyard.