Comments

View the comments this notice received through the registry. You can either download them all or search and sort below.

Some comments will not be posted online. Learn more about the comment status and our comment and privacy policies.

Download comments

Search comments

Comment ID

99702

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This development is wrong and there is no thoughtful planning put into it. Complete communities are not created with an isolated island of high density residential, surrounded by an employment area and adjacent to a 400-series Highway. Read more

Comment ID

99707

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed construction of four high-rise towers near Langstaff and the Highway 400 onramp. This development raises significant concerns, and I urge you to reconsider the approval granted through a Minister’s Zoning Order (MZO). Read more

Comment ID

99708

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
There is absolutely no logical reason for this development to be build. Absolutely everything is wrong with this. -no proper studies done -no current infrastructure present -no residential area close by -no amenities - will not add to our current housing crisis Read more

Comment ID

99710

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As a home owner living beside Langstaff and Hwy 400 I vehemently oppose the construction of high rise buildings (or similar) in the area. This area is already highly congested and thus construction will make it significantly worse. Read more

Comment ID

99711

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am a resident of Woodbridge (Rutherford and Weston neighbourhood) since 2001. As per Ontario Environment registration, MZO's are to be used for urgent decisions. the four 32+ storey apartment buildings being pushed through for development at Langstaff and Hwy. 400 are a disaster in the making. Read more

Comment ID

99713

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This letter is in response to the consideration of the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (the “Minister”) to make a Minister’s Zoning Order pursuant to section 47(1) of the Planning Act (an “MZO”) respecting the proposed development application submitted by Battcorp Holdings (Vaughan) Ltd. Read more

Comment ID

99717

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Foremost, Langstaff is very congested, in particular during the work week. Adding high density residential developments will lead to horrible traffic gridlock and effect everyone living in this area. Traffic movement needs to be studied. Read more

Comment ID

99719

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
From my basic understanding of urban planning. The idea is to keep commercial/industrial properties next to highways where there is a constant requirement for trucking to service manufacturers, distributors, and commercial businesses. Read more

Comment ID

99726

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I oppose this for environmental concerns- pollution while building, traffic concerns for number of people, population density (too many people in a small area). I also oppose as it is not visually appealing to the community. Read more

Comment ID

99731

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
It should be noted that the Region of York rightly opposes this proposal, highlighting that placing high-density residential units amid employment zones creates an isolated community. This area lacks essential residential amenities such as schools, community facilities, and walkable destinations. Read more

Comment ID

99732

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Inappropriate Use of MZO Vaughan has designated areas for intensification that are more suitable for mixed-use projects. Utilizing an MZO for this specific site bypasses the established planning framework, undermining strategic urban development plans. A mixed-use Read more