Northern Light
Superstar
There is no increase in height, its exactly the same as it was last fall.
This is just a UT reclassification of storey count based on amenity space present.
Toronto 931 Yonge | 106m | 33s | CreateTO | Zeidler
- Thread starter interchange42
- Start date
There is no increase in height, its exactly the same as it was last fall.
This is just a UT reclassification of storey count based on amenity space present.
Northern Light
Superstar
This one was at TEYCC today, and adopted (sent to Council with an approval recommendation), apparently with an amendment that is not yet posted.
@HousingNowTO was there to speak in favour.
I would be interested to hear his thoughts on the comments of the local Residents Association.
Perhaps to the surprise of some, they endorsed the size/built form in their correspondence; but suggested that the building should be 100% affordable housing instead of a developer-driven mixed model.
From the above:
@HousingNowTO was there to speak in favour.
I would be interested to hear his thoughts on the comments of the local Residents Association.
Perhaps to the surprise of some, they endorsed the size/built form in their correspondence; but suggested that the building should be 100% affordable housing instead of a developer-driven mixed model.
From the above:
Last edited:
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
...we often hear - "This should be 100% Affordable Rental housing" as a polite-cover from residents' groups who actually want the site to deliver ZERO (0) units of new affordable rental housing.
It is a obstruction-method known as "killing a project with kindness" -- we cannot say sure if that is the ABCRA's intention on the 931 YONGE STREET site, or if it is just an honest lack of understanding about how Federally funded affordable housing models work in Spring 2024.
Councillor Saxe asked us some questions about ABCRA's letter after our deputation today -- and ABCRA leadership has reached-out to HNTO for a follow-up discussion after today's rezoning APPROVAL at TEYCC.
1Ć0
Active Member
The minimal setbacks here make me proud. Gotta credit @HousingNowTO (and many others) for their great work on this one
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
Used 931 YONGE site as a background location for the opening story on CTV NATIONAL news at 11:00 PM last night...
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
When it doubt, always remember to POINT at the details on the Development Sign for the TV Cameras...
taal
Senior Member
I love the resident association's logic ... so 1/3rd affordable ownership isn't a sustainable model ... no worries we have the perfect solution for you ... 100% affordable rental ... yes, clearly that is much more sustainable. Killing with kindness indeed.
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
We cannot speak to the intentions of the RA's logic... so we will choose to read it as Naivety rather than Nastiness.
Some people are "Machiavellian" when it comes to affordable housing...but honestly, most people are just "Passionately Innumerate" on the topic.
Their affordable housing positions & preferences are based on nothing but VIBES...
Northern Light
Superstar
To be fair, innumeracy issues aside; I would strongly prefer a purpose-built rental model, to an ownership model.
I'm not sure how this one is structured, but there are usually rules limiting a new owner's ability to flip their unit for fair market value.
That said, the ownership model does expend a lot of resources to provide 'ownership' which, if limited from capitally appreciating is a very peculiar form of wealth redistribution.
Using a similar model for purpose-built rental adds an identical number of suites, as 'affordable rental' at something like $900-$1200 per month depending on unit size, but then also adds twice that in market-based rental which has, I would argue, a more desirable market-effect than does the equivalent in market ownership.
But, that ship has sailed here.
thaivic
Active Member
IMO all levels of governments need to fast track all the types of affordable rental units, lower or remove fees for any type of affordable housing. create tax incentives for developers to include a higher percentage of affordable units in new developments. The cities can also fast track development on city properties for geared to income developments. Unfortunately it takes years for shovels to be on the ground after they make their political announcements and that goes for all levels of government.
Approved at council
Northern Light
Superstar
This one is on the agenda of next week's CreateTO meeting.
I'll place the high level link here, so anyone can access the report and various other attachments:
From the report itself we get these stats:
I will note that I am very pleased to see this shift from 'Affordable Ownership' to 'Affordable Rental'. I lobbied for that and am gratified to see this outcome.
****
There is still a timeline issue here..........
9 Months for bid review and lease negotiation seems excessive to me. I do appreciate these things take time, but with the zoning settled and the requirements clear, I don't think this need to be quite that extended.
I'd like to see at least 3 months shaved off that.
I would also like to see the the note addressed by establishing appropriate criteria in the Market Offering (Experienced proponent who can and will expeditiously advance planning approvals etc.)
Also, we've discussed CMHC ad nauseum here, but the City needs to get a move on and get the Feds to agree to a pre-approved envelope of mortgages/guarantees which the City can simply assign.
I'll place the high level link here, so anyone can access the report and various other attachments:
From the report itself we get these stats:
I will note that I am very pleased to see this shift from 'Affordable Ownership' to 'Affordable Rental'. I lobbied for that and am gratified to see this outcome.
****
There is still a timeline issue here..........
9 Months for bid review and lease negotiation seems excessive to me. I do appreciate these things take time, but with the zoning settled and the requirements clear, I don't think this need to be quite that extended.
I'd like to see at least 3 months shaved off that.
I would also like to see the the note addressed by establishing appropriate criteria in the Market Offering (Experienced proponent who can and will expeditiously advance planning approvals etc.)
Also, we've discussed CMHC ad nauseum here, but the City needs to get a move on and get the Feds to agree to a pre-approved envelope of mortgages/guarantees which the City can simply assign.
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
The report above (more or less) has moved on to the agenda of next week's Planning and Housing Ctte:
I've posted the light level link so people can access the assorted attachments.
I've posted the light level link so people can access the assorted attachments.
Northern Light
Superstar
Referred at Ctte, not sure why, maybe @HousingNowTO can shed some light.
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
931 YONGE was originally going to be "Affordable Ownership" units (eg. Habitat & Options for Homes, etc)... now that it is under the new RENTAL HOUSING PLAN that was just passed by Council a few weeks ago, they need to re-work the pro-formas for revised CMHC submissions.
Expecting it to return to PHC in September 2024 with "New Math", etc.