News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.6K     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 1.2K     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 445     0 

Inclusionary zoning and affordable housing

^Oh my word! Housing designed for median income households. Like me! This is great, now to just wait a few years. I can ditch the overpriced condo living, finally.
 
, it's not clear why new home buyers are the ones who should carry the cost of subsidizing affordable housing. That should be the general tax base's responsibility. Imagine some rich old people living in their homes in Rosedale wouldn't pay a dime to support affordable housing, yet the first time home buyer shelling out for a market rate condo will.
I've never thought of it like that. Good point. Ideally the city should purchase the subsidized units from the builder and have TCHC operate them.
 
Ontario cities should build more family-friendly row house rentals, CMHC report says

By Tess Kalinowski Real Estate Reporter
Thu., Jan. 30, 2020

A report from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. (CMHC) suggests it might be time for Ontario cities to rethink the apartment-heavy rental supply with an injection of more family-friendly row houses, which currently account for only 5.3 per cent of purpose-built rentals.

The Housing Market Insight report on row house rentals in Ontario comes amid a revival of development interest in purpose-built rentals in cities such as Toronto, where many families live in apartments and condos without enough bedrooms.

 
Ontario cities should build more family-friendly row house rentals, CMHC report says

By Tess Kalinowski Real Estate Reporter
Thu., Jan. 30, 2020



That seems backwards, and based on a false premise. Ontario hasn’t been building any highrise or mid rise rental for years. Instead it’s condos, condos, condos, often privately rented. Let’s get some highrise rental building before we start rowhouses.
 
That seems backwards, and based on a false premise. Ontario hasn’t been building any highrise or mid rise rental for years. Instead it’s condos, condos, condos, often privately rented. Let’s get some highrise rental building before we start rowhouses.

Actually, Toronto has been building a fairly large amount of highrise rental buildings throughout this current boom. There's been notable new rental tower additions near Islington station, High Park station, St. Clair West station, Don Mills station, North York CC, Yonge & Eg area, and scattered around the downtown core. The Honest Ed's redevelopment being the highest profile example and is completely rental.
 
Actually, Toronto has been building a fairly large amount of highrise rental buildings throughout this current boom. There's been notable new rental tower additions near Islington station, High Park station, St. Clair West station, Don Mills station, North York CC, Yonge & Eg area, and scattered around the downtown core. The Honest Ed's redevelopment being the highest profile example and is completely rental.
Good point, I’d forgotten about those. That seems like something we need more of, rather than using limited footprints for row house rentals.
 
Good point, I’d forgotten about those. That seems like something we need more of, rather than using limited footprints for row house rentals.

I agree.

The row houses have their place though...for example as replacement for the sea of SFHs known as the Yellow Zone. Raze that nonsense to the ground, this isn't Pheonix.
 
I agree.

The row houses have their place though...for example as replacement for the sea of SFHs known as the Yellow Zone. Raze that nonsense to the ground, this isn't Pheonix.
Aren’t those people’s private homes? Even if they wanted to blockbust out the property owners like private-public developers did with St. Jamestown in the 1960s, the city can’t afford the expropriated market value.
 
Aren’t those people’s private homes? Even if they wanted to blockbust out the property owners like private-public developers did with St. Jamestown in the 1960s, the city can’t afford the expropriated market value.

I know. I just hate the waste of space that it all is and wish it would go away. Just being a dreamer, mate.
 
City of Toronto to spend $47.5M to build 250 supportive modular housing units

Posted April 29, 2020 5:26 pm

The City of Toronto has announced it will be spending $47.5 million to build 250 supportive modular housing units as part of a pilot project to help those who are homeless.

Officials said two three-storey buildings with 110 units each will be erected by Horizon North on a City-owned site by September. The first phase will cost $20.9 million, of which $8.25 million in grants and loans is being provided by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

The second phase will see 140 units built at a second City-owned site by April 2021.

 
Are these permanent structures?

Looking at their previous project in Vancouver, it sort of feels like these buildings are an interstitial use for the site until long-term redevelopment plans can be made.


The modular housing models in Vancouver are considered to be temporary until future long-term solutions are established:

In September 2017, the BC government committed $66 million towards the development of 600 new units of temporary modular housing in Vancouver. This will allow the City and the Province, through BC Housing, to address the immediate and urgent needs of homeless residents in Vancouver while more permanent housing is being created. This initiative is intended to respond to the current homelessness crisis by providing homeless residents with immediate access to appropriate supportive housing until they can transition to longer-term housing solutions.

---------
Building on the success and learnings from the temporary modular housing pilot project at 220 Terminal Ave. that was developed by the Vancouver Affordable Housing Agency (VAHA), it will act as the developer on behalf of the property owner, BC Housing, to deliver these additional 600 temporary modular housing units throughout Vancouver.

Temporary modular housing utilizes pre-fabricated modular construction in a factory to allow for rapid assembly of housing units on site that can be relocated at a future date as required. The new housing will be built on underused or vacant sites across Vancouver. Modular construction can be completed in 50 per cent less time than a traditionally constructed building and is designed to meet the City’s building codes.

The temporary modular housing currently being developed in Vancouver will be in place for up to five years, with the possibility to extend an additional five years on each site. The modules can easily be relocated and reconfigured to fit a range of sites, helping to optimize vacant City or privately-owned lots.


 
Toronto could build more affordable housing. Why won’t it?

Alex Bozikovic
June 6, 2020

Housing Now is the city’s program to build housing on land that it owns. It turns underused sites into new developments, where private condos and apartments help pay for cheaper subsidized rentals. It is very modest. It serves mostly people earning low to middle incomes, not those most in need.

It’s still significant. Last week city council added six sites to the program, bringing the total to 17 sites and an estimated 12,000 apartments. The challenge is using those sites effectively: The bigger the building, the more affordable housing. But the first round of proposals are all too small.

City Councillor Brad Bradford, a trained planner who worked for three years at the city, says the city should be pushing harder. “If these sites are supporting a public policy objective, delivering affordable housing, then these sites could do more,” Mr. Bradford said. “The [planning] and the process should reflect that goal.”

-------
The problem is land-use planning and urban design: all the rules that a city makes to decide what can be built, where and in what shape. Toronto’s are convoluted and outdated. They are shaped by decades of regressive politics and inertia. Private developers push to build bigger, and they routinely win – often with the support of city planners.

But with Housing Now, the city itself refuses to play this game. Its real estate agency, CreateTO, largely defers to city planning, following the rules – often terrible rules – that other people get to ignore.

Mr. Bradford, rightly, sees this as a problem. “I think it’s time to revisit some of the fundamental assumptions we’ve made in city planning over the past few decades, and get back to our core objectives,” he said.

He’s concerned with assumptions like the one I began with: keeping bigger buildings away from smaller houses. “The basic idea is that a contrast in scale, between existing low-rise buildings and anything new, is a problem,” explains Mark Sterling, a private-sector planner and architect who heads the master of urban design program at the University of Toronto. “They can’t exist alongside each other, and the difference has to be smoothed out in some way.”

 

Back
Top