Toronto Mirvish Village (Honest Ed's Redevelopment) | 85.04m | 26s | Westbank | Henriquez Partners

IsaacKhouzam said:
As far as I can tell, the reason we don’t see them being built now is because costs are high and the demand for larger units in denser forms is not sufficiently strong. People in Toronto who want (or think they want) more space don't envision themselves living in an apartment, and nobody has yet had the vision to make a compelling case to the contrary.
Click to expand...

The gap between prices is just too large for people to ignore when they have two kids. Unless you place a very high premium on living downtown and close to transit, you are pushed to the suburbs. Bring that premium down and people like my colleagues (who are generally well-off and urban-oriented) will choose to live more often in downtown apartments.
 
evandyk said:
I mostly agree with your entire post regarding family-sized units, but I think this overstates the expectations of the types of people who would like to live downtown with kids. Our last apartment was 1150 sf and it was plenty for a family of three, but didn't end up working out for us as our kid got bigger - because of the lack of access to outdoor space. We had a really long, narrow balcony that was nice to sit on, but didn't really have room even for a dining table.

We built a laneway house that is 1350 sf and has access to a shared backyard, and it's perfect for us. We'd want one more bedroom if we had one more kid, but that doesn't bring you to 2000 sf. People who want to live close to the subway and have a short commute to work recognize the compromises you have to make. It's just right now there is a real shortage of places in that 1500 sf range with some quality outdoor space (even if it's shared). 2000 and your own backyard isn't necessary at all.
Click to expand...

I can mostly agree with the above, but would point out your modest, but functional outdoor space that allows for dining and maybe a BBQ or small garden is likely in the range of 200ft2 at the low end.

I would also offer, your child is still fairly young, you have only 1, and presumably, he's not yet enrolled in hockey or the like.

Many families have 2 kids, often of the opposite sex, for most, that means separate bedrooms and ideally separate bathrooms, if not for modesty, for practicality when everyone needs to get ready at 7-8am.

While you may think I'm underestimating space, all those people in 2,000ft2 ++ with yard and garage homes are saying that's what they need; some, are content to have that in the burbs, but others would love to have that downtown, if it were on offer at at a sensible price.

evandyk said:
I have a lot of friends and colleagues who have moved to the suburbs and regret it. The problem is that it costs $1.5M for an apartment/stacked town that you can live in with two kids close to the subway, and half that for a much bigger house far away from your office.
Click to expand...

Absolutely that's the problem, and that was a fundamental point. That we are unwilling/unable to square that circle and no amount of permissive zoning, or lowered DCs is going to get us there.

We have to manage population growth, first and foremost, but we also need interventions in the market (or removed interventions) such as the principle residence open ended capital gains exemption which encourages investors over live-in residents.
 
IsaacKhouzam said:
I don’t think the fact that developers are profit-driven precludes the possibility of cheaper units. By that logic prices would never go down in any sector! If costs (land, construction, development fees, etc.) went down and developers felt that there was a market for larger units at lower prices, it would be in the interest of making profits to offer them. Until recently, small units have sold well and costs have been high, so small units are what we’ve gotten; but if there were demand for larger units and the ability to provide them, there’s no reason to think they wouldn’t be built. As far as I can tell, the reason we don’t see them being built now is because costs are high and the demand for larger units in denser forms is not sufficiently strong. People in Toronto who want (or think they want) more space don't envision themselves living in an apartment, and nobody has yet had the vision to make a compelling case to the contrary.
Click to expand...

The Toronto condo market has completely collapsed, but other than fire sales for already-built but unsold inventory or sales by under water investors, there has been no shift in the market to build at or offer cheaper prices.

There has been a shift to rental, however, without public financing at below market rates to builders, along with a host of DC and tax waivers, virtually none of it would get built. Meanwhile, even that which is being built is largely unaffordable using the traditional matrix of rent should equal 30% of income.

So Toronto is your test market, we have some of the most liberalized zoning on the continent, no minimum parking, incentives and waivers out the wazoo.......and still.....no one is building affordable, livable accommodation.

The degree to which we need to fundamentally alter supply, including who is building it, and the degree to which we must also address low and stagnating incomes is staggering.

Let me repeat though, that I'm in favour of the permissive zoning measures for which I myself advocated; and they do make a modest, but positive difference at the margins.

It's merely that the difference is at the margins.

If we were to reconcile pricing to fix the price to income ratio, prices would have to drop by upwards of 40%.

If we fix that on the income side, that's roughly 67% increase in comes.

Neither is on the immediate horizon I'm afraid.
 
Supposedly coming to Mirvish in one of the heritage homes (600 Markham street) this spring!

'Book Bar Toronto'

They have similar ones in New York and London which I have been to and are truly community art/cultural hubs in their own right, but it's the first of its kind in Toronto. From what I know, it's going to be amazing.
More photos on their instagram!



IMG_8259.jpg





IMG_8258.jpg
 
Last edited:
abovegrade said:
Supposedly coming to Mirvish in one of the heritage homes (600 Markham street) this spring!

'Book Bar Toronto'

They have similar ones in New York and London which I have been to and are truly community art/cultural hubs in their own right, but it's the first of its kind in Toronto. From what I know, it's going to be amazing.



View attachment 693797




View attachment 693796
Click to expand...
This looks awesome. Reminds me of a place with a similar vibe in Copenhagen, Paludan Cafe
Image from google maps
Screenshot 2025-11-06 at 14-19-25 Paludan Bog & Café - Google Maps.png
 
This Paludan Café reminds me a lot of a bookstore/restaurant that existed in the late 1980s, early 1990s, on the west side of Yonge, north of Eglinton, in a building that was replaced with a condo a few years ago, and I am quite sure it was called "Chapters" (not that Chapters - it was before then). I had lunch there occasionally.
 
Bayer said:
This Paludan Café reminds me a lot of a bookstore/restaurant that existed in the late 1980s, early 1990s, on the west side of Yonge, north of Eglinton, in a building that was replaced with a condo a few years ago, and I am quite sure it was called "Chapters" (not that Chapters - it was before then). I had lunch there occasionally.
Click to expand...
It was called Chapters. (I worked there, briefly, in 1987, if I remember correctly.)
 
abovegrade said:
Supposedly coming to Mirvish in one of the heritage homes (600 Markham street) this spring!

'Book Bar Toronto'

They have similar ones in New York and London which I have been to and are truly community art/cultural hubs in their own right, but it's the first of its kind in Toronto. From what I know, it's going to be amazing.
More photos on their instagram!



View attachment 693797




View attachment 693796
Click to expand...
Woohoo! Late night books and booze 😊Maybe one day my vision of a bookstore with a cafe/bar overlooking the scramble at Sankofa Square will come true 🍀🙏🍀
 
Northern Light said:
Honestly, I respect you as a poster, but I don't think this post looks good now, never mind how it ages.

It reads as badly as a firm NIMBY...."I want what I want when I want so give it to me"

There's a failure to recognize that your vote and preference is no more (or less) important than the next persons. AND

That most 'next' people don't share your vision.

Its not merely hirise vs lowrise or the aesthetics of brick vs precast though those certainly play a role.

Its the among of living space one desires. Even if you don't have kids...........let alone if you do.

Its easy for single people or those in tight couples with high personal space tolerance to say everyone should live in 500ft2, or even 700ft2.

The reality is most people desire, if not need, at least 1,000ft2, even if they're single.......a family of 4 needs 2,000ft2., plus a yard.

I say that as a champion of higher density, someone who lives in multi-storey rental building, and uses transit regularly.

I'm always astounded by people thinking their preferences (not better ideas) should prevail over the preferences of others.

We can and should offer better rental and midrise accommodation (but we haven't been) ; but even now, the stuff people want to be excited about, new mass-timer, and 6-9s mainstreeet builds...are coming in
with 500ft2 1bdrms, 2bdrms at sub 700ft2, and few 3bdrms, most under 1,000ft2
.
Few people who have or want to start families will accept this.

Yes, we can be more efficient that traditional SFH in more places, and we should. Scrapping SFH bungalows along Victoria Park for midrise sounds grand.

But the idea that small little boxes in the sky are the answer for everyone and anyone not interested is the enemy strikes me as a profound problem and something that sets the cause of good urban planning back.

It can, it has, and it will produce a virulent backlash.

Unless and until, we achieve minimum unit sizes, 25% or more 3-bedroom accommodation, and greater outdoor space and/or sidestreets kids can go play on safely........ we're setting up a no-win situation.
Click to expand...
It’s funny - people read what they want into other people’s arguments. Just to reiterate:

* Apparently I need to make this clear: people can prefer to live in whatever house they want.
* Should everyone get to live in whatever house they want, where they want? Well, land values say no to that dream.
* When we choose what style of house to live in, it comes with trade offs. Most people who want a backyard need to live far away from transit.
* If we want to prioritize letting people live their suburban dream next to the CBD, those houses will be for the rich.
* The rich in these houses will also get all the benefits of living in a walkable neighborhood that is readily accessible to transit like subways.
* I don’t like this. I’m not sure why we need to prioritize those people’s desires, and force many lower income people to live far away from the benefits of downtown life.
* If this argument seems “NIMBY”ish (??) so be it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top