Margaret Atwood is really mad about some condos being built near her house

Alterra Developments wants to build an eight-storey, 16-unit condo mid-rise on Davenport Road, on the northern edge of the Annex. It’s normal for neighbours to be perturbed by new buildings in their backyards, but in this case the issue is a bit more complex: one of the neighbours happens to be Margaret Atwood, and she is pissed.

Atwood and her husband, Graeme Gibson, both wrote strongly worded letters to the city objecting to the development proposal on the grounds that it would disrupt the neighbourhood and kill trees. So did Loblaw CEO Galen Weston, who owns a home nearby with his wife, Alexandra. Retail heiress Cleophee Eaton, who also lives in the area, chimed in as well. Of all these high-powered condo opponents, though, only Atwood has an active social media presence. Last night, she became the target of a Twitter pile-on, as people accused her of being out of touch with Toronto’s new housing reality, where condos are the norm and Annex houses are reserved for the elite few. Here’s how it all went down.

Atwood didn’t respond well to being called an oppressor:

Please inform yourself. My neighbours have been there decades. Way before prices went up, + when it was mostly cults+ rooming houses

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

Nor was she going to let anyone accuse her of being a wealthy fat cat. (The target of this tweet had a pretty good comeback.)

Tell you what. Trade you. You get to be old + decrepit with accumulated $ put by over a lifetime, I get to be young and yell at you. Deal?

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

For all her conviction, Atwood didn’t seem to be that well versed in the planning process. The city amends its zoning bylaws constantly. Virtually every new development taller than a few storeys requires some form of zoning review. And the city’s report says the building on Davenport will only impact six privately owned trees:

I don't believe my neighbours are protesting density as such. It's the violation of the bylaws and the killing of their trees.

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

She suggested her feelings on the matter might have been different if the development proposal had included some low-cost housing:

Have you Looked at the proposal? "Needed"? Affordable housing is "needed." This is not. Why not ask the developer to change to Affordable?

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

It’s debatable whether anyone who owns land in the Annex could be considered “un-rich” at this point, but Atwood isn’t having it:

The un-rich have owned their houses for decades. Why should a devlpmnt go right up to their lot lines and kill their beloved trees? https://t.co/7WL9lKg1HE

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

Things got emotional:

But what are you suggesting I do? Right now? Jump off a bridge to create space? But some rich person would reno my house. You know it

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

And then they got dramatic:

Never mind. Once I'm dead, market forces will take over, and I will doubtless be tortured in Hell for living in the wrong place.

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

And then they got generational:

I have young relatives. I do know. Nor is that true re: "my entire generation," most of whom are dead. Maybe you're thinking of the Boomers.

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017

And make what you will of this:

Hmm, maybe it's time for me to move out of #toronto. I didn't like it much when I moved in. #CatsEye

— Margaret E. Atwood (@MargaretAtwood) August 29, 2017