And I’m sure that’s what most developers and investors who are completing their projects now were expecting too, but when people can’t close and units sit idle doesn’t seem like much profit to go around.
And if this forum is only pro-development rather than focus on if areas can actually handle the development, seems like it’s just filled with developers, landlords, and others who likely don’t live in the city and don’t care about the well-being of citizens who own and pay taxes to keep the infrastructure going.
If you read the posts of many forumers here, including my own, you'll find that most people's positions are quite nuanced.
Most agree that median architectural quality could be better, and that unit sizes have been far too small for a long time now.
There are many other critiques offered, of various proposals from the number of elevators relative to units/residents, to postage-stamp parks that make no sense, to poor layout of both retail and residential suites.
That said, most here are not anti-development, but rather, pro quality development. The exact amount, height, architectural style etc. are personal preferences and vary widely.
In comparison to the number of condos going up, there isn’t a balance of new business coming in unless it’s a spa, nail salon or golf simulation. Far more business have fallen than opened, which is why pushing thousands more to the city when businesses are literally dying is dumb and horrible city planning! They are planning a massive development on top of Corktown Station and at the community event mentioned less than 200 jobs would become available when thousand of new units are to be built…how does that make sense? Of all the condos built in the last year, for lease signs in all the ground floors. I’ve lived in the area for over 10 years and have seen the area literally deteriorate. King East of Sherbourne is a perfect example of businesses forced out because of developments that haven’t happened in over 5 years. Look at the empty plot of land thanks to Fitzrovia, sitting idle for how many years and there were at least parking lots and restaurants that made some money and kept the economy moving.
The City has reached a record number of jobs, with much of that growth concentrated in the core. The jobs aren't factory jobs anymore, for the most part, they are jobs in finance, accounting, law, architecture, health, education and research.
The Toronto Employment Survey is a public document. You can find it, here:
https://www.toronto.ca/city-governm...anning-development/toronto-employment-survey/
But let me bring the summary forward:
That's not to suggest everything is perfect on every block, or that many jobs in retail, security, health support worker and other categories are not too low in pay. But overall the picture is not disastrous.
In terms of retail on the east side of the core, note that Fitzrovia's site and adjacent buildings at Queen/Dalhousie are filling up with new retail and a hotel that will employ many as well. There have been many other bits of new retail, and next year a Food Basics will open just off Queen, east of Sherbourne and will create a couple of hundred jobs.
Yes there are some strips that have been denuded as builders readied them for a condo market that no longer exists. No, that's not ok, but let's not over dramatize either.
Just for reference, the financial district is absolutely in walking distance of this site, and that is the largest concentration of jobs in the country.
The logic for adding housing in downtown could not be stronger.
I agree with most of the above; and certainly don't oppose this development; but 'walking distance' to the financial district is a stretch. Sure, its feasible, but we all know from the 15 minute City studies that 15 minutes walking distance is most people's limit for routine walks for commutes or chores.
That equates to 1km (assuming a 4km/ph walking pace)
The distance from this site to Bay and Adelaide is 1.2km
Certainly some residents who will live in this site will walk to jobs in downtown, but the majority will likely take transit. Nothing wrong w/that! Just sayin.
We don't need more low quality growth for the sake of growth/further padding the oligarchs' pockets. All of the artificial housing growth juiced by governments in cahoots with big business has been demonstrably harmful for people and planet.
I agree with your sentiment, though we certainly still have too little housing for the current population, particularly in the purpose-built rental space.
This particular proposal is not a favourite of mine for how to meet that need, but it will do so, to some degree.
I wouldn't call it growth for growth's sake even assuming the City's population growth is, in fact, temporarily arrested. I would use downward pressure on rents as a reasonable proxy for balance. Big landlords will hold out as long as they can...
but we really need to see a further decline of at least 20% . More if we can't get incomes up.
There’s a ton of affordable housing units in this development, I would say that’s a pretty good thing for our City…
Agreed.
