Toronto RioCan Hall | 145.2m | 42s | RioCan | Hariri Pontarini

xy3 said:
I hope this affordable housing will be built on the outskirts to build as many self contained units as possible for the cheapest price.
Click to expand...
It is Section-37 funding, so it will be spent to "benefit the community in the vicinity of the lands" (ie. within the same ward).

Also, building affordable-housing "on the outskirts to build as many self contained units as possible for the cheapest price" is a pretty terrible policy.

Sure the land is cheap in a Transit-Desert in Malvern, but it is CHEAP for a reason... because the access to jobs and services is pretty terrible if you can't afford to own and operate a car.

The goal should be to create new Affordable-Housing units in mixed-income neighbourhoods where people can access Schools, Jobs and Services mostly within their "15-minute neighbourhoods".


thediscourse.ca

Think your Scarborough home is far from buses? You’re probably in a transit desert

Our data analysis confirms: this suburb’s average access to transit is three times worse than the City of Toronto.
thediscourse.ca thediscourse.ca
 
HousingNowTO said:
It is Section-37 funding, so it will be spent to "benefit the community in the vicinity of the lands" (ie. within the same ward).

Also, building affordable-housing "on the outskirts to build as many self contained units as possible for the cheapest price" is a pretty terrible policy.

Sure the land is cheap in a Transit-Desert in Malvern, but it is CHEAP for a reason... because the access to jobs and services is pretty terrible if you can't afford to own and operate a car.

The goal should be to create new Affordable-Housing units in mixed-income neighbourhoods where people can access Schools, Jobs and Services mostly within their "15-minute neighbourhoods".


thediscourse.ca

Think your Scarborough home is far from buses? You’re probably in a transit desert

Our data analysis confirms: this suburb’s average access to transit is three times worse than the City of Toronto.
thediscourse.ca thediscourse.ca
Click to expand...

I essentially agree with the above; though, I would add a caveat.

We should, as a City, be pro-active in transforming transit-deserts and under-serviced communities into supportive, well-connected, 15-minute neighbourhoods.

That, however, does not take away the need for housing in the urban-centre and other job and service-heavy areas.
 
Northern Light said:
I essentially agree with the above; though, I would add a caveat.

We should, as a City, be pro-active in transforming transit-deserts and under-serviced communities into supportive, well-connected, 15-minute neighbourhoods.

That, however, does not take away the need for housing in the urban-centre and other job and service-heavy areas.
Click to expand...
Agreed, and that is what is happening in and around Flemingdon Park and Thorncliffe Park for example via the Crosstown LRT and the Ontario Line. However, those proactive-programs are always a 20+ year task from start to finish... and the additional housing/services have to follow the transit from a federal funding POV.

urbantoronto.ca

770 Don Mills | UrbanToronto

770 Don Mills, Toronto by 1, Montgomery Sisam Architects
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
 
HousingNowTO said:
The goal should be to create new Affordable-Housing units in mixed-income neighbourhoods where people can access Schools, Jobs and Services mostly within their "15-minute neighbourhoods".
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see how the concept of mixed-income neighborhoods actually plays out with these section 37 funds and from other Entertainment District projects.

Will those funds result in new affordable housing that is actually located in the Entertainment District (an area where social and affordable housing is clearly underrepresented relative to its intense residential densities) or will those funds simply be directed, for example, to projects north of Queen in the Alexandra Park area where there is already a significant concentration of social housing?

It's always easier to build social housing where it already exists as opposed to where it doesn't, but doing so means we're simply be building two very different kinds of communities that happen to share some proximity or ward boundaries, rather than developing true mixed income neighbourhoods.
 
Some better images (screenshots from the Feb 2021 docs)... assume these are still current.

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/te/comm/communicationfile-128035.pdf

Rio-2.jpg

Rio-1.jpg

Rio-4.jpg

Rio-3.jpg
 
Office, Residential and actual non-200sqm retail???? Prayers answered. (I can't recall if anyone confirmed that 'theatre' was still a cinema?)
 
Last edited:
What's with the gap toothed all-curtainwall sections? :( The brick pillasters should continue uninterrupted from ground to the crown.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
HousingNowTO said:
It is Section-37 funding, so it will be spent to "benefit the community in the vicinity of the lands" (ie. within the same ward).

Also, building affordable-housing "on the outskirts to build as many self contained units as possible for the cheapest price" is a pretty terrible policy.

Sure the land is cheap in a Transit-Desert in Malvern, but it is CHEAP for a reason... because the access to jobs and services is pretty terrible if you can't afford to own and operate a car.

The goal should be to create new Affordable-Housing units in mixed-income neighbourhoods where people can access Schools, Jobs and Services mostly within their "15-minute neighbourhoods".


thediscourse.ca

Think your Scarborough home is far from buses? You’re probably in a transit desert

Our data analysis confirms: this suburb’s average access to transit is three times worse than the City of Toronto.
thediscourse.ca thediscourse.ca
Click to expand...
That's very idealistic in my opinion. I would agree with you if the budget for affordable housing was unlimited.

I'd rather commute an hour everyday on transit and have my own bachelor unit in Rexdale, than be forced to live with roommates in the downtown where I'm closer to work.

With the approach you're advocating for, as many as 15-25% fewer units will be built because it's on premium real estate.

I already commute 45 minutes a day from a basement unit at ellesmere and warden (gasp!) to downtown for my work. Sure I'd love a bachelor with a balcony, but with the approach this city is taking with affordable housing. theres a 90% chance I will never qualify or be able to afford one. It's even questionable if i'll be able to afford a basement unit in the future.
 
Last edited:
HousingNowTO said:
Back at Council next week with for "six million, two hundred thousand ($6,200,000.00) dollars to be allocated towards the provision of new affordable housing and/or the Toronto Community Housing Corporation revolving capital fund for repairs to Toronto Community Housing Corporation housing in the local Ward"... we really need some OPEN DATA to be able to track what the actual delivery is on all of these "one-off" Settlement and Section-37 deals .

At least someone in Councillor Cressy's team was smart enough to INDEX those cash-deals to the increased Construction-Costs for each tranche of payment. That should be a standard clause on ALL of these deals now.

ITEM - http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2021.TE23.10
View attachment 351232
Click to expand...

Somehow, this one got deferred again...........and is back at next week's Council Meeting.

 
New renderings are updated. There is project information changed. The building storey count changed from 42 & 39 to 42 & 37 storeys. The height changed from145.08m & 136.54m to 145.20m & 130.95m. Finally, the total unit count increased from 685 units to 693 units.

Renderings are taken from the architectural plan via Rezoning submission:

PLN - Architectural Plans (1 of 2) - MAY 8 2020-1.jpg


PLN - Architectural Plans (1 of 2) - MAY 8 2020-2a.jpg


PLN - Architectural Plans (1 of 2) - MAY 8 2020-2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top