<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>blogTO Recent Comments: Hypocracy: Making the Case for 48 Abell</title>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/feed/recentcomments/?4242</link>
<description>Comments recently made in this post on blogTO</description>
<copyright>Copyright 2009</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:06:33 PST</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>Michelle</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Actually, the building failed the structural assessment not as it stands but based on how it would be able to withstand having two towers incorporated into it with parking below grade.  This is a tall order for a 123 factory or any historical building.  As is, the structure is pretty robust.

If you ever have been an Abell resident, please get in touch with me!  I am currently studying trends in artist geography based around this whole land development battle (and the gentrification) and wish to map out where anyone coming to Abell came from and where they have gone to... 

michelle.van.eyk@gmail.com]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c613092</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c613092</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:17:36 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>VP</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Good article. As a resident of the building (for 4 years) there are number of things I did not know about intill now. Whats this about the building structurally unsound? Im one of the few people who dosnt get into my unit through the actual building. I have to use the teenage wasteland of an alleyway (which I have grown quite accustomed too).

I would like to do what I can to save the building as I truly have a deep and passionate love for warehouses. Where else am I going to have 2,400 square feet for so cheap that down town to set up my green screen and motion studio?

I would like to know more about whats going on as the tower behind me is inches away from blocking out all of my precious sun.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c579153</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c579153</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:39:17 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kelly</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Susan - one would assume that you work for one of the developers based on your comments. Those of us who actually reside in the area are not naive to the reality of gentrification. Fear? Not so much. But nice try. It's moreso the opinion of intelligent individuals who care about maintaining the character of Queen West. Add on to that, "developers" (I hesitate in refering to them as such) like UrbanCorp who profit off the backs of new home buyers by "building" townhomes that are constructual disasters. But yes, let's put our support behind the developers because we know that they are truly concerned with the  interests of the community, right? Not only are they destroying the character of this neighbourhood, but they (I can only refer to UrbanCorp) are throwing together makeshift, poorly (understatement) constructed, profit earning townhomes that leave first time buyers distraught and broke. But hey, here's to the future.]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c301797</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c301797</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:22:07 PDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Susan</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Great Article!  You can really make things seem dire if you just play up people's fears.  Maybe you left out the fact that Verdiroc is proposing to replace a section of the site at 48 Abell Street with 190 affordable housing units to be run by St. Clare's Multifaith Housing, because that might frighten people.  Oh my, and 30-40 of those units are specially designed for the displaced "artists".  Also, the development will happen in two phases to ensure that most of the current tenants at 48 Abell can move into the new building.  Damn Developers just moving into the neighbourhood to make a buck on the artist's back.  OH.....that arguement does work, because Verdiroc DOESN'T OWN 48 Abell Street.  The lamp factory who has owned the building since the 80's does.  And aren't they the same people that have started the whole studio rental business when their lamp business slowed down?  I guess they have been laying low since the 80's waiting for the artists to push up the property value....Sneaky Buggers!

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that the buiding is illegal..........]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c98260</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c98260</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 10 Feb 2007 14:59:15 PST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Mark Dowling</title>
<description><![CDATA[
Sheryl, those pesky structural assessments are just getting in the way of the Art!  What is art if not done dangerously?  

I would have thought right wingers on Council would have voted to reprieve 48 Abell since if it fell down on said artists Rob Ford would probably rejoice at any savings from Toronto arts grants (or as he terms them "handouts").]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c97197</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c97197</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 13:55:16 PST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Sheryl</title>
<description><![CDATA[
My understanding is that the building can't be given historical status because it's in such a bad state of repair that it failed the structural assessment.

I live in the area (Queen & Dufferin), and while I think the OMB does have too much power, I don't think this case is a misdirected abuse of that power.

I also think the city needs to decide what they want and stick with it. The so-called official plan calls for more density along major transit routes downtown to hold back sprawl. The only real way to do that is to build UP - so either they want to encourage new residential development downtown (and I don't see any of the proposed adjacent  condo towers offering reasonably-priced artist space or below-market rent), or they want to allow themselves to be influenced by people who are all for development - just not near them.

There's no doubt that 48 Abell will change the face of the community - but why is everyone assuming that will be a bad thing?]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c96532</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c96532</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 15:38:41 PST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Steve</title>
<description><![CDATA[
As a resident of the building, I don't necessarily feel the Abell structure is worth saving. Yeah, I don't want a farm of condos either, but isn't there some middle ground? Couldn't something other than condos be built on the Queen West Triangle? Perhaps a giant park?

There was an interesting counter-argument to your rhetoric recently over on Torontoist: 
http://www.torontoist.com/archives/2007/01/anger_over_hous_1.php]]>
</description>
<link>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c96439</link>
<guid>http://www.blogto.com/city/2007/02/hypocracy_making_the_case_for_48_abell/#c96439</guid>
<category>Toronto, City</category>
<pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2007 12:31:05 PST</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>