Another Utility bites the dust!
Monday, November 29, 2010
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Not anymore...They are knocking me down!
November 27th., 2010
The water is off and the trees are gone
The lawn is not cut and the tenant has gone
The hydro is not off but that won't be long
Now only a dead house but once a home...
No music, no laughter, not a hint of a song!
Not anymore, they are knocking me down.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Demolition marches On - November 26, 2010
November 26th., 2010
Utility Crew arrives to shut off water at 66 Baby Point Road
Workman asks "Are these people nuts ?"
Now ain't that the truth... the Emporer's clothes fable in our own front yard.
The common man knows reality when he sees it day in & day out
Workman asks "Are these people nuts ?"
Now ain't that the truth... the Emporer's clothes fable in our own front yard.
The common man knows reality when he sees it day in & day out
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Update on Impending Demolition of 66 Baby Point Rd
Update:
November 24th saw the utility people arrive to cut of the electricity to 66 Baby Point Road. Demolition Derby is just around the corner even though winter is almost upon us.
If 66 Baby Point Road was like the family homestead above, then demolition would be understandable. However, truth be told, it isn't and in spite of statements by the owners that this Arts & Crafts style home has "bad bones" this claim challenges credulity... a home with wide planked oak floors, wainscoting to covet and so on!
All this and more have waited for a new owner with imagination, sensitivity to local concerns and a commitment to heritage preservation.. It is not to be!
Robert Home Smith, Conn Smythe and the ghosts of Babys' past, among others, are probably rolling over in their graves at this display of architectural sacrilege and hubris.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Demolition of 66 Baby Point Road Underway
November 14, 2010
The final chapter in the desecration of an historic neighbourhood has commenced. Note the markings on the lawn outlining the position of water & electricity service locations!
Seven months has passed since Mr. & Mrs. Lorne Bozinoff were granted site plan approval by City Council to demolish a 90 year old home at 66 Baby Point Road and erect in its place a 7,000 sq ft. three story home.
The majority of the neighbourhood registered their opposition to this project at every level available to them. All to no effect. Over the last 2-1/2 years since the Property was purchased by the Bozinoffs' they have awaited in vain for communication from the principals that they would modify or adapt there plans in order to integrate them with the existing built culture and heritage of this historic neighbourhood.
This neighbourhood was created by the forethought and vision of the late Robert Home Smith, and his design associates in the Toronto Land Corporation and the Humber Valley Estates. A responsible land development company that brought in to existence the Kingsway,the Old Mill, Riverside Drive among others.
The establishment of fully treed and wide street scapes, with judicious placement of the homes and the creation of spacious apertures between individual houses achieved an eye pleasing vista throughout the Baby Point Region. A built culture that rivals any other residential area in the City of Toronto for aesthetics and sensitivity to the geography of the area, that on the north or Baby Point Road side, includes the slope lands of the Humber River ravine.
The Community Council got it wrong, The City Council got it wrong. Councillor Bill Saundercook got it wrong as the recent election demonstrated, and those residents of the area that support this undertaking have also got it wrong.
The present home at 66 Baby Point Road is a central feature of the street scape that limits the Baby Point Circle on the north side of that area. It has what is called by Toronto Preservation Services, "contributory value" to the integrity of the area. It not only has that distinction, but in point of fact, it contributes more to the integrity of the area than any single other home in that group.
Several individuals who support the project, have commented that the available drawings of the new edifice look "nice". Mr. Bozinoff has publicly stated "you will like my new house".
However, they have all missed the point. The oversized new home cannot take on the role of being the "lynch pin" that integrates the architectural diversity of the north side of "Baby Point Circle". In fact, it will destroy it.
The contributory role played by 66 Baby Point Road in forming the aesthetics of the present streetscape did not happen by accident. It is the result of careful architectural design and land use planning. The placement of the present house on the curvature of the street creates a focal point that leads the eye in a gentle sweep around the curve of the north side of Baby Point Rd. It is the centrepiece of the seven homes that form the northern residential boundary of "The "Circle".
The relatively smaller size of this house assures that it does not dominate the streetscape but passively embraces it and melds quietly into it. The wide space between the adjacent homes is the design feature that achieves a sense of spaciousness for the neighbourhood.
Finally, the "Arts and Craft" design is sufficiently varied from the adjacent six homes that it creates a sense of individual identity to each of them while seamlessly integrating all of them into a visual tapestry that embraces the open spaces of "The Circle" to the south.
The demolition of this house cannot be viewed in isolation. The adverse effect on the remaining homes and the Baby Point Circle street scape is incalculable. However, let there be no doubt, the effect will be profoundly negative and irreversible.
The size of the new home, at twice the size on average of the adjacent homes, insures that it will dominate the street. Its placement will not be on the previous footprint, but on a new setback line. As a consequence, this will disrupt the visual rythym of the "en echelon" placement of the remaining houses as designed by Home Smith's architects and land use planners.
In addition, the lot line to lot line occupation of the property will significantly diminish the sense of spaciousness that is the hallmark of the neighbourhood by eliminating the wide visual apertures and associated sightlines to the north.
It has been said that money has no ethics, it also has no sense of aesthetic values. In all cases these attributes derive from the individual in whose pockets the money rests.
Over the century that has passed since Home Smith acquired the Baby Point lands (once the historic home lands of Sir James Baby) it has been the unspoken commitment that those who came to live in this historic neighbourhood, or aspire to live here recognizing the areas unique character and heritage, would respect the original design covenants established by Home Smith.
It is a large responsibility, but one which is easy to transgress if one is not mindful of the above maxim.
It is now universally recognized ,with the benefit of hindsight, that the only protection that historic enclaves such as Baby Point have, in the face of the onslaught of expressions of wealth and personal ambition, is the protection offered by designation as a Heritage Conservation District.
However, the barriers to achieving this distinction are many, including significant financial considerations. Consequently, an HCD may be beyond reach in the immediate future! It will require a major commitment by the community at large and major support at both the governmental level of the city and at the provincial level to achieve this goal.
The final chapter in the desecration of an historic neighbourhood has commenced. Note the markings on the lawn outlining the position of water & electricity service locations!
Seven months has passed since Mr. & Mrs. Lorne Bozinoff were granted site plan approval by City Council to demolish a 90 year old home at 66 Baby Point Road and erect in its place a 7,000 sq ft. three story home.
The majority of the neighbourhood registered their opposition to this project at every level available to them. All to no effect. Over the last 2-1/2 years since the Property was purchased by the Bozinoffs' they have awaited in vain for communication from the principals that they would modify or adapt there plans in order to integrate them with the existing built culture and heritage of this historic neighbourhood.
This neighbourhood was created by the forethought and vision of the late Robert Home Smith, and his design associates in the Toronto Land Corporation and the Humber Valley Estates. A responsible land development company that brought in to existence the Kingsway,the Old Mill, Riverside Drive among others.
The establishment of fully treed and wide street scapes, with judicious placement of the homes and the creation of spacious apertures between individual houses achieved an eye pleasing vista throughout the Baby Point Region. A built culture that rivals any other residential area in the City of Toronto for aesthetics and sensitivity to the geography of the area, that on the north or Baby Point Road side, includes the slope lands of the Humber River ravine.
The Community Council got it wrong, The City Council got it wrong. Councillor Bill Saundercook got it wrong as the recent election demonstrated, and those residents of the area that support this undertaking have also got it wrong.
The present home at 66 Baby Point Road is a central feature of the street scape that limits the Baby Point Circle on the north side of that area. It has what is called by Toronto Preservation Services, "contributory value" to the integrity of the area. It not only has that distinction, but in point of fact, it contributes more to the integrity of the area than any single other home in that group.
Several individuals who support the project, have commented that the available drawings of the new edifice look "nice". Mr. Bozinoff has publicly stated "you will like my new house".
However, they have all missed the point. The oversized new home cannot take on the role of being the "lynch pin" that integrates the architectural diversity of the north side of "Baby Point Circle". In fact, it will destroy it.
The contributory role played by 66 Baby Point Road in forming the aesthetics of the present streetscape did not happen by accident. It is the result of careful architectural design and land use planning. The placement of the present house on the curvature of the street creates a focal point that leads the eye in a gentle sweep around the curve of the north side of Baby Point Rd. It is the centrepiece of the seven homes that form the northern residential boundary of "The "Circle".
The relatively smaller size of this house assures that it does not dominate the streetscape but passively embraces it and melds quietly into it. The wide space between the adjacent homes is the design feature that achieves a sense of spaciousness for the neighbourhood.
Finally, the "Arts and Craft" design is sufficiently varied from the adjacent six homes that it creates a sense of individual identity to each of them while seamlessly integrating all of them into a visual tapestry that embraces the open spaces of "The Circle" to the south.
The demolition of this house cannot be viewed in isolation. The adverse effect on the remaining homes and the Baby Point Circle street scape is incalculable. However, let there be no doubt, the effect will be profoundly negative and irreversible.
The size of the new home, at twice the size on average of the adjacent homes, insures that it will dominate the street. Its placement will not be on the previous footprint, but on a new setback line. As a consequence, this will disrupt the visual rythym of the "en echelon" placement of the remaining houses as designed by Home Smith's architects and land use planners.
In addition, the lot line to lot line occupation of the property will significantly diminish the sense of spaciousness that is the hallmark of the neighbourhood by eliminating the wide visual apertures and associated sightlines to the north.
It has been said that money has no ethics, it also has no sense of aesthetic values. In all cases these attributes derive from the individual in whose pockets the money rests.
Over the century that has passed since Home Smith acquired the Baby Point lands (once the historic home lands of Sir James Baby) it has been the unspoken commitment that those who came to live in this historic neighbourhood, or aspire to live here recognizing the areas unique character and heritage, would respect the original design covenants established by Home Smith.
It is a large responsibility, but one which is easy to transgress if one is not mindful of the above maxim.
It is now universally recognized ,with the benefit of hindsight, that the only protection that historic enclaves such as Baby Point have, in the face of the onslaught of expressions of wealth and personal ambition, is the protection offered by designation as a Heritage Conservation District.
However, the barriers to achieving this distinction are many, including significant financial considerations. Consequently, an HCD may be beyond reach in the immediate future! It will require a major commitment by the community at large and major support at both the governmental level of the city and at the provincial level to achieve this goal.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Baby Point Heritage Foundation
We have completed the incorporation of
http://www.babypointheritage.ca/indexbph.html
The Baby Point Heritage Foundation (BPHF)August 20,2010 as an incorporated entity under Industry Canada guidelines.
http://www.babypointheritage.ca/indexbph.html
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Response to New Bylaw Re:Density Allowance
BY eMAIL
pgmc@toronto.ca
August 19, 2010
City Clerk
Attn: Merle MacDonald
Administrator, Planning and Growth Management Committee
Toronto City Hall
100 Queen Street West
10th Floor, West Tower
Toronto, ON, M5H 2N2
Dear Madam:
RE: Written Submission with respect to the Proposed City Wide Zoning By-law in relation to proposed Zone RD (x1209) and the exceptions on Baby Point Road from the proposed Zoning By-law
I am writing on behalf of the Baby Point Heritage Foundation, which is a corporation, with respect to the above noted matter which I understand is to be considered by City Council at their meeting of August 25/26, 2010.
The Baby Point area is a truly significant community from a cultural heritage perspective. Originally a Seneca village, the lands were then settled in 1816 by James Baby, a member of the Family Compact, before being developed by Home Smith commencing in 1912. The focus of this area is the ‘Point’ which is located on a peninsula of land or ‘point’ overlooking the Humber River, generally in the area west of Humbercrest Blvd.
The Baby Point Heritage Foundation has recently been formed to ensure that the heritage of this remarkable area is protected for future generations through the creation of a Heritage Conservation District. The Board of the Foundation currently consists of four committed individuals from the neighbourhood including the undersigned.
Based on our review of the proposed By-law, the majority of the ‘Point’ is proposed to be zoned “RD(x1209)” with two properties, one of which is 66 Baby Point Road, being exempted from the Zoning By-law apparently because of recent development approvals.
The proposal for 66 Baby Point Road generated considerable concern in the neighbourhood because of the ‘over sized’ building which is proposed. This building, while it conforms with the existing zoning regulations, is completely out of keeping with the heritage character of the area. It is through the review of this application that we, and others in the neighbourhood, became aware of issues with the existing zoning regulations.
In reviewing the most recent version of the proposed City-wide Zoning By-law, we expected that the concerns with the current By-law would be addressed. Unfortunately, based on our review, that does not seem to be the case. In fact, the regulations do not appear to take into account in any material way the unique character of this area. It is our understanding from a review of the various reports that these regulations have not been developed on the basis of any area study. In the absence of any study, we believe this by-law, if passed, should be very conservative in introducing new standards into any part of the City, and most particularly in a heritage area such as Baby Point. However, that does not seem to be the case.
The specific concerns we have identified with the “RD(x1209)” Zone are as follows:
1. Conservation Overlay
The Bylaw includes a Conservation Overlay which applies to the majority of the land in the RD (x1209) Zone. The Conservation Overlay prohibits development below the stable top of bank or shoreline hazard limit. It also contains a provision in Section 600.30 (4) which states:
"If a shoreline hazard or stable top-of-bank crosses a lot, the portion of the lot below the shoreline hazard limit or stable top-of-bank is not included in the calculation of the floor space index for the lot."
This appears to address an issue with the current zoning by-law. However, the section appears to be flawed in that it refers only to floor space index as a measure of permitted density. This is an issue because the proposed new zoning applicable in the RD (x1209) Zone, does not appear to include a floor space index regulation. Instead the RD (x1209) Zone includes only a maximum coverage requirement. As a consequence of this difference in wording it is questionable whether subsection (4) would apply in the RD (x1209) Zone . This is a concern because if it does not apply, then density from the portion of a lot below the top of bank can be used as part of the calculation of the coverage for any house along the ravine, which includes a significant number of homes on the ‘Point’. This would contribute significantly to the potential for new development which is out of keeping with the heritage character of the area.
2. Coverage/Setbacks
The proposed Bylaw as currently drafted would allow a maximum coverage of 50% of the lot area. Previously the maximum floor space index was 0.4 and there does not seem to be any coverage requirement. The change from the floor space index approach (which relates to the total gross floor area of the building as a percentage of the lot area) to a coverage figure which looks at only the percentage of the lot occupied by a building and with the coverage being a maximum of 50% would appear to allow a significantly larger building foot print then currently permitted.
Further, there does not appear to be any front yard or rear yard setback requirements and the side yard requirement is very minimal at 0.45 for lots under 12m frontage and 0.75 m for lots over 12 m frontage.
The combination of the effect of these new regulations would again appear to contribute significantly to the potential for new development which is out of keeping with the heritage character of the area.
3. Exemptions from the By-law
As noted, two properties are excluded from the proposed new zoning by-law. This area was originally planned in a comprehensive manner. That is a key part of the cultural heritage value of the neighbourhood. It is important that all properties be subject to the same rules with respect to future development.
Based on these concerns, we are requesting that Council defer consideration of this By-law, or at least the RD (x1209) regulations, until appropriate changes can be made to develop regulations for the Baby Point area which will assist in preserving the unique character of the community, rather than allowing for the potential of development which is out of keeping with its unique heritage character. These changes should reflect a more detailed examination of the area and input from the affected community.
Thank you for your consideration of this request, and should you have any questions please contact the undersigned.
Please also accept this letter as written confirmation of our request to be notified in writing of any and all further meetings and notices (including the Notice of Decision for the Zoning By-law).
Your truly,
Dr. Robert Galway
Chairman Baby Point Heritage Foundation
62 Baby Point Road, Toronto M6S 2G3
c.c. Councilor Wm. Saundercook
© 2010 Microsoft Terms Privacy
pgmc@toronto.ca
August 19, 2010
City Clerk
Attn: Merle MacDonald
Administrator, Planning and Growth Management Committee
Toronto City Hall
100 Queen Street West
10th Floor, West Tower
Toronto, ON, M5H 2N2
Dear Madam:
RE: Written Submission with respect to the Proposed City Wide Zoning By-law in relation to proposed Zone RD (x1209) and the exceptions on Baby Point Road from the proposed Zoning By-law
I am writing on behalf of the Baby Point Heritage Foundation, which is a corporation, with respect to the above noted matter which I understand is to be considered by City Council at their meeting of August 25/26, 2010.
The Baby Point area is a truly significant community from a cultural heritage perspective. Originally a Seneca village, the lands were then settled in 1816 by James Baby, a member of the Family Compact, before being developed by Home Smith commencing in 1912. The focus of this area is the ‘Point’ which is located on a peninsula of land or ‘point’ overlooking the Humber River, generally in the area west of Humbercrest Blvd.
The Baby Point Heritage Foundation has recently been formed to ensure that the heritage of this remarkable area is protected for future generations through the creation of a Heritage Conservation District. The Board of the Foundation currently consists of four committed individuals from the neighbourhood including the undersigned.
Based on our review of the proposed By-law, the majority of the ‘Point’ is proposed to be zoned “RD(x1209)” with two properties, one of which is 66 Baby Point Road, being exempted from the Zoning By-law apparently because of recent development approvals.
The proposal for 66 Baby Point Road generated considerable concern in the neighbourhood because of the ‘over sized’ building which is proposed. This building, while it conforms with the existing zoning regulations, is completely out of keeping with the heritage character of the area. It is through the review of this application that we, and others in the neighbourhood, became aware of issues with the existing zoning regulations.
In reviewing the most recent version of the proposed City-wide Zoning By-law, we expected that the concerns with the current By-law would be addressed. Unfortunately, based on our review, that does not seem to be the case. In fact, the regulations do not appear to take into account in any material way the unique character of this area. It is our understanding from a review of the various reports that these regulations have not been developed on the basis of any area study. In the absence of any study, we believe this by-law, if passed, should be very conservative in introducing new standards into any part of the City, and most particularly in a heritage area such as Baby Point. However, that does not seem to be the case.
The specific concerns we have identified with the “RD(x1209)” Zone are as follows:
1. Conservation Overlay
The Bylaw includes a Conservation Overlay which applies to the majority of the land in the RD (x1209) Zone. The Conservation Overlay prohibits development below the stable top of bank or shoreline hazard limit. It also contains a provision in Section 600.30 (4) which states:
"If a shoreline hazard or stable top-of-bank crosses a lot, the portion of the lot below the shoreline hazard limit or stable top-of-bank is not included in the calculation of the floor space index for the lot."
This appears to address an issue with the current zoning by-law. However, the section appears to be flawed in that it refers only to floor space index as a measure of permitted density. This is an issue because the proposed new zoning applicable in the RD (x1209) Zone, does not appear to include a floor space index regulation. Instead the RD (x1209) Zone includes only a maximum coverage requirement. As a consequence of this difference in wording it is questionable whether subsection (4) would apply in the RD (x1209) Zone . This is a concern because if it does not apply, then density from the portion of a lot below the top of bank can be used as part of the calculation of the coverage for any house along the ravine, which includes a significant number of homes on the ‘Point’. This would contribute significantly to the potential for new development which is out of keeping with the heritage character of the area.
2. Coverage/Setbacks
The proposed Bylaw as currently drafted would allow a maximum coverage of 50% of the lot area. Previously the maximum floor space index was 0.4 and there does not seem to be any coverage requirement. The change from the floor space index approach (which relates to the total gross floor area of the building as a percentage of the lot area) to a coverage figure which looks at only the percentage of the lot occupied by a building and with the coverage being a maximum of 50% would appear to allow a significantly larger building foot print then currently permitted.
Further, there does not appear to be any front yard or rear yard setback requirements and the side yard requirement is very minimal at 0.45 for lots under 12m frontage and 0.75 m for lots over 12 m frontage.
The combination of the effect of these new regulations would again appear to contribute significantly to the potential for new development which is out of keeping with the heritage character of the area.
3. Exemptions from the By-law
As noted, two properties are excluded from the proposed new zoning by-law. This area was originally planned in a comprehensive manner. That is a key part of the cultural heritage value of the neighbourhood. It is important that all properties be subject to the same rules with respect to future development.
Based on these concerns, we are requesting that Council defer consideration of this By-law, or at least the RD (x1209) regulations, until appropriate changes can be made to develop regulations for the Baby Point area which will assist in preserving the unique character of the community, rather than allowing for the potential of development which is out of keeping with its unique heritage character. These changes should reflect a more detailed examination of the area and input from the affected community.
Thank you for your consideration of this request, and should you have any questions please contact the undersigned.
Please also accept this letter as written confirmation of our request to be notified in writing of any and all further meetings and notices (including the Notice of Decision for the Zoning By-law).
Your truly,
Dr. Robert Galway
Chairman Baby Point Heritage Foundation
62 Baby Point Road, Toronto M6S 2G3
c.c. Councilor Wm. Saundercook
© 2010 Microsoft Terms Privacy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)