They should partner with someone to complete the land assembly with the lots on Close Ave and Dunn Ave and deliver purpose-built rental.
That being said, I can't imagine ANY rental provider in the city wanting to add more of Parkdale to their portfolio. That area is a no-fly zone now because of all the recent activists and calls for "withholding rent".
In fairness, those situations have mostly arisen with landlords taking buildings that were predominately affordable, and trying to drastically raise rents and find any excuse to remove longer-term tenants who had sub-market rent deals.
That may not universally be the case, but I know that applies in 2 buildings in particular.
In both cases the landlords did not make any real effort to build rapport with or treat existing tenants fairly.
Truthfully, I don't understand why landlords don't offer generous buy-outs in such circumstances. The R.O.I is typically there. Most tenants would be worse off in the longer term; but would accept a windfall of cash.
If you have a tenant with a $1,000 below market rent............So let's say $1,300 when market would be $2,300 if the unit were updated.
You offer the tenant 1 years rent in cash to exit, so $12,000; you renovate the unit for $24,000 (new floor, paint, kitchen and bath), you're out 36k. You'll earn ever dollar of that back in 3 years on a new lease. That's an excellent ROI.
Hell you could pay the tenants 24k to get out and still make out like a bandit.
But instead we tend to see questionable eviction moves; tenant harassment, inadequate heat, or maximized above-guideline rent increases.
That's not just mean, its a very inefficient way to raise your ROI.
Lots of tribunal activity, legal and administrative burden, and maybe even police involvement if tenant harassment or the like is at issue.
****
A new purpose-built rental would come in with a rent that would be high-end of market if it was a private portfolio addition. I don't imagine it would attract those types of issues in the near to medium term.
The question is whether that would be the best use of a public land holding; or whether a co-op/non-profit would be a better partner, with government financing the outstanding land assembly.